Charging engineering students more for their education
Charging engineering students more for their education
(OP)
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS Come Join Us!Are you an
Engineering professional? Join Eng-Tips Forums!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Posting GuidelinesJobs |
Charging engineering students more for their education
|
Charging engineering students more for their educationCharging engineering students more for their education(OP)
Red Flag SubmittedThank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts. Reply To This ThreadPosting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! |
ResourcesThe world has changed considerably since the 1980s, when CAD first started displacing drafting tables. Download Now
Prototyping has always been a critical part of product development. Download Now
As the cloud is increasingly adopted for product development, questions remain as to just how cloud software tools compare to on-premise solutions. Download Now
Engineering-centric businesses face a number of challenges today, but unmanageable design and change processes don’t need to be counted among them. Download Now
|
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Shouldn’t then football players pay the most?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
- Steve
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
When I started at University, I was in a basic engineering 101 class with 45 Civil Engineering students, when I graduated 4 years later I was with 10 Civil Engineering Students...... and not one other peer was with me from the engineering 101 class. Using the statistics provide to me by NCEES only 70% passed the FE the first time and only 33% passes the Structural I exam the first time when I took it. Using that information out of 45 students....only 3-4 wold be practicing structural engineers at this point (figuring some repeat takers passing the exams). So from beginning to end, 90% of the class either didn't graduate as an engineer or failed at the PE exam. I think that is a pretty good weeding of the riff raff.
Of course, this is coming from someone who probably shouldn't have made it through.... and never would have made it through 40-50 years ago when a calculator was only for the privileged.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
If the government (be it state federal or whatever) is subsidizing the education in some way (be it student grants, low cost student loans, money to the university system directly...) then is it unreasonable for them to see where their best return on investment may be.
In this case it might be argued that courses which will give greater payback to the govt due to higher taxes on higher earnings (as well as any multiplier effects), as well as those which have some other clear beneficial effect on society/the economy should in fact benefit more from any govt subsidy (in whatever form) while those courses with less pay back to society should actually receive less subsidy in whatever form.
I believe there was talk in Texas of something along these lines.
This may mean some arts majors etc. pay full ticket price for their education with less subsidy of any loans etc. I find it hard to believe the academic elite would allow this to happen, if nothing else the issue of education for education sake V 'trade school' will probably be brought up and vociferously argued.
Plus, government may not do a good job at predicting what majors will be in demand in the future and so could misdirect any rationing/subsidies messing things up further.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
I was talking about this to a recent graduate in Australia and she said that her student loans are paid by her income tax. The way she describe it is that:
- Once she got a job, she calculates her income tax on wages earned in Australia
- The income tax she calculated is applied directly to her outstanding student loan
- If she immigrates then the debt reverts to a traditional loan
- When the loan is paid off, her taxes go where everyone else's taxes go
This seems like a really good way to apply economic policy to further a country's goals. It would probably work for a state, but you have to worry about some of the interstate commerce issues (and Texas doesn't have an income tax).David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
B+W Engineering and Design
Los Angeles Civil Engineer and Structural Engineer
http://bwengr.com | http://bwstructuralengineer.com | http://bwcivilengineer.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
B+W Engineering and Design
Los Angeles Civil Engineer and Structural Engineer
http://bwengr.com | http://bwstructuralengineer.com | http://bwcivilengineer.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
If as a matter of policy you decide to subsidise some courses, that is fine, but it should start from a sensible discussion about costs and priorities.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
The architect, very upset by the discussion, went to HR to complain about his salary. He was told that the market had been flooded and he could be replaced easily.
So, if we base tuition on future earning potential, do we run the risk of pushing more people into the lower cost education (with lower future earning potential)? If so, then do we not further decrease the earning potential of these people? Just like it may have a positive impact on engineering salaries.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
So far as the USA goes
1)engineering degrees cost more to run than basket-weaving degrees
2)US industry claims there are not enough engineering graduates (we know what that really means)
3)Engineering graduates claim they cannot get well paid attractive engineering jobs with good prospects.
4)Engineers tend to earn more than basket-weavers.
Obviously points 2 and 3 can't both be true in the same way. Obviously employers would say that they just can't qualified engineers to work for minimum wage, and some graduates would say that they should be on a red carpet ride to a corner office with a minibar.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
There in is part of the tricky bit. Being good at maths & science at school are necessary but in my opinion often insufficient prerequisites for being a good engineer and enjoying (at least relatively) being an engineer.
I'm far from convinced there's a lack of engineering graduates in terms of sheer numbers in the US. There may be a lack of engineers with the right skills willing to work for the 'right pay' as Greg suggests. There may also be a lack of willingness on behalf of some employers to take grads and continue their eduction (or potentially have more effective internship/sandwich year courses etc.).
There might even be too many people taking engineering that while good at maths and physics don't have much interest in engineering as such and so don't thrive in industry.
There may also be students that determine that engineering seems harder than certain other courses and think they can get better grades for the same or lesser effort in another course of study.
In our recent recruiting they have wanted folks with certain precision instrumentation/machinery skills which in practice has meant recent phd candidates from one of the few schools that have a directly relevant graduate research dept. Of these recent phd candidates nearly all of them have been non US residents. Now whether this is because all the US resident phd grads have better opportunities elsewhere or because there are a lot more non US resident Phd candidates in these fields I don't know for sure.
Simplistically though it might suggest that the effective cost for US grads to get these Phd's is already too high?
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Tuition needs to be high enough to deter kids who are just wasting their time partying with no intention of graduating, but low enough and/or paired with grants to ensure that it's not a barrier to kids without supportive parents or whose parents aren't rich. Public education is a fundamental societal and economic value- it's essential to counteract the tendency to generate a static aristocracy and a static under-class. We've seen too much of that already in the last 20 years.
Shortage? The only shortage is of employers willing to hire fresh grads and train them. The business lobby want a cheap, cowed workforce that was entirely trained at someone else's expense. They never want to see wages rise in response to skills demand. And in engineering, they haven't.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
If there really is a shortage of engineers, they should be charging less so more people could afford it. Besides, any engineering major has plenty of weed-out classes to keep those who can't handle it out of the profession.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Spot on.
This concept of artifically raising tuition to curb the supply of engineers is very short-sighted. Raising tuition would be a great deterrent for people to apply to engineering but not to weed-out slackers but to weed-out the under privileged and under supported. Who do you think the slackers are? The well-off kids who haven't had to work for entrance scholarships, who's parents pay their tuition and therefore have no relation to the importance of them taking their schooling seriously. Do you think that an under priveldged kid, who busted her/his butt in high school to get scholarships and then busts her/his butt to work while in class is going to throw that all away by partying? Really?
Furthermore, whether they are under privileged or not has everything to do with their ability to pay for increased tuition but nothing to do with their ability to become a good engineer. In fact, increased tuition would put more pressure on an under privileged kid to take time away from studies to work in order to pay for next year's tuition or this months rent. It could take otherwise good engineers and make them less apt. In the end you've not only not effectively weeded-out the slackers but you've made it more difficult for some that really want to be there and really want to work.
The other solution is to restrict successful applicants based on entrance requirements. It has been argued that this will prevent some good future engineers, that are not so academically proficient, from being accepted. I certainly agree that some students with less than stellar grades can make great engineers (and that the opposite is true). However, this is fine because not all engineering grades are planning on going into field engineering nor are they planning on staying in academia. So entrance requirements should be reflective (and supportive) of the diversity in end goals that an engineering degree can provide. This means that it needs to test the background theoretical knowledge (proficiency in math and physics) as well as "hands-on" knowledge (this is more difficult but for example: spatial awareness, mock "failure analysis", etc). The evaluation should respond well to those that post good marks in both areas but also low marks in one area and very high marks in the other area.
This appears to show very little bias to academic engineers, field engineers, well supported engineers and under privileged engineers. Of course the devil is in the details but it can be done. It certainly does a better job in keeping an engineering education accessible to all people that have the apptitude and desire to excel in engineering.
(and can we please stop being so degrading to all arts subjects by referring to them as basket-weaving. Yes, the engineering cirriculum is tough. Be proud of getting through it but don't let that pride in your efforts turn into arrogance over others. We sit here and complain that engineering doesn't get the respect it deserves, while showing no respect to other fields of study.)
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Yeah, what you refer to is the HECS loan (higher education contribution scheme) provided by the Australian government. Its interest free, but it is indexed for inflation each year. The taxation office starts adding your repayments to your income tax once you reach $44,000.
Almost all of our universities are public and the majority of their funding comes from the government, unlike the US which has a mix of public and private with the UC's and ivy league and all that. As such, the government placed a "cap" on the number of HECS available seats offered for each course at the respective university, say bachelor of engineering at university X will admit 1000 HECS students for the 2014 year. If your wealthy enough, you can just pay the fees up front, international students are ineligible.
As almost 90% of australian students are HECS students, this worked well as the numbers were relatively controlled by targets. However, in 2011 the government, in all their infinite wisdom wearing rose tinted glasses, took the caps on enrolments away in favour of a "demand driven system", meaning a degree could be filled with an infinite amount of people if they got in. There was a reason for it though, 6 months later they also announced huge cut backs to university funding. So, naturally, what have the uni's done in the last 2 years? Let every tom dick and harry in of course! Many of the older academic staff are worried that courses are being dumbed down and entry limits lowered in an effort to get bums on seats and thus more $$. Im pretty sure last year was a record year for engineering enrolments. Going by the statistics, half of them will make it to graduation, but the end result is still more engineers than what our economy needs. Like the US, we also have a mythical "engineering shortage" that the media and big business like to pedal. The outlook is just downright scary for those in non science fields like law, finance and business, teaching and nursing, which are already at saturation point.
Follow the way of the dodo...
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
What we have at the moment is an oversupply of entry-level candidates in everything except professions like medicine which control their admissions rates. That makes things tough, as you can't blame someone for leaving if, unlike my neurosurgeon classmate, there is no opportunity at home to work in your chosen profession. He had plenty- he just went where the cash was, to a nation which spends 17% of its GDP on healthcare whereas we spend only 11%.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
I still do believe it is one of the better systems around. For the under advantaged it gives them a bootstrap and a means to get a degree without finding themselves in a pernicious situation.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
A better deal than some countries. But there are newspaper articles about potential UK students deciding to spend their money elsewhere now as there is no financial incentive to study at home.
- Steve
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
you'd think that university education was like any other service ... higher quality providers (better schools) can charge more, lower quality charge less. it seems that most countries have done a better job of this (costs of tertiary education) than the US.
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
The way the Australian system was explained to me is that if you don't file taxes in any year prior to paying off your education, then the remaining amount reverts to a standard interest-bearing loan. You would have to get a hell of an offer outside the country for that to make sense (i.e., going from you regular tax bill covering your loan to having to pay taxes and the loan). I have the feeling that if you blow off the loan payments it would be really expensive to ever return to the country.
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Wow.
Here's an idea, how about people who are going to college getting useless degrees instead QUIT GOING TO COLLEGE. I went to college to get a degree that had a job at the end of it. That every nitwit in the country went to college on federally subsidized debt to get degrees of zero worth is the actual problem, not that engineering degrees are too cheap.
Wow.
This just burns me up.
Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East - http://www.campbellcivil.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
http://www.payscale.com/college-education-value-20...
Is the point to lower the rate of return on an engineering degree to a point where it isn't even an attractive degree? This is on top of the fact that the U.S raised the H1-B by over 60% in a poor economy, which means that wages will be suppressed due to the fact that H1-B workers are abused since they aren't mobile because they require corporate sponsorship. So, they want to increase the tutition for engineering degrees while at the same time making huge increases in the H1-B quota. Wages will be suppressed, less U.S citizens go into engineering due to wages and tutition, those in engineering are competeting with those without huge debt, and industry screams even more about a shortage.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
However, I am concerned about the phrase "...higher earning potential..." In a free market, the customers who want the engineering services determine what they will pay based upon how bad they want it. But who is to be the determinant of the correct level of income to specify as the "earning potential" for any one discipline? While you are correct that supply and demand is (or in capitalist economic theory, should be) determined by the market, I worry that earning potential might be determined by some government or academic committee.
My specific fear is suppose a government/academic committee sets earning potential levels and meets every six months to review and adjust the levels. Then by definition the actual market rate would be disconnected from the mandated earning potential for 179 out of 180 days each half year. And would one table of "earning potential" parameters be able to account for differences in real earnings between, for example, engineering in Yunnan province China as compared to Frankfurt, Germany? What government or academic committee would be able to determine where the engineering students might actually work before they assign an earning potential factor?
I hope that provides additional information so you can undertand my concern.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Truly “misdirected” people are those that go into a field of study that go against their own passions. They go into law because Dad was a lawyer (despite hating law), they go into business because they feel they can make the most money there (despite hating business), they go into engineering because the odds of getting a job are high (despite hating engineering). Often these people scuff at and degrade those arts majors that do what they love, as some form of self-justification of their unhappiness.
I understand most of these anti-arts comments are meant to be tongue-in-cheek but if we have an issue with the current state of engineering, let’s not use the arts (or any other field of study) as a (defenseless) whipping boy of our frustrations when it has very little (to nothing) to do with those issues.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
We also did straight engineering. My course work was fluids, thermo, solid mechanics etc, etc. No gender studies or the like. You could always do a double degree if the arts really interested you.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/20/opinion/granderson-c...
Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East - http://www.campbellcivil.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Beyond their naivety, these comments also serve no purpose in addressing issues related to engineering. If you want to make a case that “basket-weaving” classes for “misdirected”, “entitled twits” have a negative impact on the engineering profession, fine, we can discuss that. But, here’s the kicker, you actually have to articulate your argument in a logical way.
Furthermore, did people actually read the article or just the headline/first sentence? The headline and first sentence are just questions to elicit conversation. The article talks, almost exclusively, about the negative impacts of differential price structures (lower enrollment, specially in minority groups and that the data itself is rather spurious). All in all, it’s an inane article...but that doesn’t mean we can’t do a better job of discussing the topic.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
"Let me Google That For you"? Cute. Ill informed, but cute. Ill mannered, but cute. Incredibly pretentious, but cute. I actually watched hundreds of interviews with the people in the tents. I was interested. I watched the ones interviewed by Fox, and felt like I was getting a cherry picked lot of idiots. I watched the ones interviewed by CNN and while the cherry picking was looking for a different result, the people in the tents still came across as idiots. I watched the ones interviewed by CBS and even with their careful editing, the people in the tents still came across as unsure as to why they were there. I watched the ones interviewed by Jon Stewart's staff from the Daily Show and laughed along with the audience. Other than a few "leaders" of the "leaderless" organization, the message coming out from the few who could articulate an opinion was "I've got an important degree and can't find a job and it is the fault of Wall Street". Person after person after person interviewed would say things to the effect that if they had found a job out of college they wouldn't be in the park, and it was someone else's fault that they couldn't find a job.
So, twit, I do not feel a bit uninformed and see no reason to ask for an excuse. I stand by my statements. The "movement", in spite of grandiose statements on Wikipedia and elsewhere of their lofty goals, was populated by entitled twits who had not been able to monetize their liberal arts education.
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
(Lemony Snicket is the pseudonym of the author of the "Series of Unfortunate Events" children's books, which are themselves worth a bit of an adult read)
Thirteen Observations made by Lemony Snicket while watching Occupy Wall Street from a Discreet Distance
1. If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald.
2. “Fortune” is a word for having a lot of money and for having a lot of luck, but that does not mean the word has two definitions.
3. Money is like a child—rarely unaccompanied. When it disappears, look to those who were supposed to be keeping an eye on it while you were at the grocery store. You might also look for someone who has a lot of extra children sitting around, with long, suspicious explanations for how they got there.
4. People who say money doesn’t matter are like people who say cake doesn’t matter—it’s probably because they’ve already had a few slices.
5. There may not be a reason to share your cake. It is, after all, yours. You probably baked it yourself, in an oven of your own construction with ingredients you harvested yourself. It may be possible to keep your entire cake while explaining to any nearby hungry people just how reasonable you are.
6. Nobody wants to fall into a safety net, because it means the structure in which they’ve been living is in a state of collapse and they have no choice but to tumble downwards. However, it beats the alternative.
7. Someone feeling wronged is like someone feeling thirsty. Don’t tell them they aren’t. Sit with them and have a drink.
8. Don’t ask yourself if something is fair. Ask someone else—a stranger in the street, for example.
9. People gathering in the streets feeling wronged tend to be loud, as it is difficult to make oneself heard on the other side of an impressive edifice.
10. It is not always the job of people shouting outside impressive buildings to solve problems. It is often the job of the people inside, who have paper, pens, desks, and an impressive view.
11. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.
12. If you have a large crowd shouting outside your building, there might not be room for a safety net if you’re the one tumbling down when it collapses.
13. 99 percent is a very large percentage. For instance, easily 99 percent of people want a roof over their heads, food on their tables, and the occasional slice of cake for dessert. Surely an arrangement can be made with that niggling 1 percent who disagree.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Who said "suddenly"? /recognizing/ the true cost of providing a particular degree course may happen suddenly, but the cost was always there. I'm pretty sure the operating costs of my labs was way beyond what any basket weaving degree would cost. Running steam engines, turbines, and internal combustion engine on dynos costs hundreds of dollars an hour in the real world. We had an entire boiler and steam turbine to run in one lab.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technolog...
***
As far as the whole "hard work gets you rich" argument, I think if everyone took a step back and looked at it objectively, the truth is that there are several important elements to getting rich, and you don't need all of them:
- Work hard (getting a real non-fluff degree fits in here, but is not essential)
- Be born intelligent
- Be lucky
- Have rich parents
Those are really the four. If you look at statistics, having only one of those will get you to about the top 30% of earners in the USA. Having two of them will get you to the top 10%. Three gets you to the top 1%. And when you're counting, "Rich Parents" counts twice.
Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East - http://www.campbellcivil.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
But back to student loans - where were the parents when the children took out the loans? I would have stood in front of a bulldozer to prevent my kids from getting into serious student debt. When my daugher fell in love with a $55,000 a year college, I calculated her projected monthly payments how many pairs of expensive designer jeans she would be foregoing each month. Luckily this changed her mind.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Now protesters seem to think that legal infractions done in the name civil disobedience should be viewed as free speech and not interfered with.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
But both diverged, because the establishment Reds and establishment Blues saw both of them both as a threat and an opportunity. Ailes and the religious right hijacked the Tea Party and turned them basically into the Angry Wing of the Republican party. (although the Ron Paulers are slowly stealing it back) Big Media hijacked OWS and turned it into the Angry Wing of the Democratic Party, until they started behaving like anarchists, and then sorta rubbed them out all together.
I get a real kick out of watching "Americans Against the Tea Party" posts on Facebook which are actually supporting original Tea Party principles without realizing it.
Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East - http://www.campbellcivil.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Where does 'marry money' fit in, under 'Be lucky' or 'Work hard'?
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Honestly, in most cases I'm aware of, "marry money" stems from "have rich parents." :)
Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East - http://www.campbellcivil.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
Maui
www.EngineeringMetallurgy.com
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
but often a degree is a ticket to a ballgame.
i think that somewhere on the list should be ...
have 1 really good idea ... copying what other people are doing usually doesn't get you rich; seeing something new or a new application/opportunity of an existing idea can.
have the personality to back yourself when everyone says you're nuts.
i wonder if intelligence is being over-rated. if you have the flash of insight, the drive to make it real, the luck to have the right factors at the right time, then i think you're a long way there.
somehow, having rich parents sounds so much easier ! closely followed by rich in-laws, or stealing a tonne of money from the mafia.
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
RE: Charging engineering students more for their education
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"