"The famous paper Estimating the Return to College Selectivity Over the Career Using Administrative Earning Data (2011) by Dale and Krueger raises the possibility that on average, attending a more selective college doesn’t raise earnings at all. They found that as a group, there was no statistically significant difference in income later in life between students who went to more selective colleges and students who went to less selective colleges. Their finding is somewhat robust: it’s based on a large (~10k) sample size, it’s true both of the class of 1976 and the class of 1989, it’s true of the class of 1976 from age 25 through age 50 and it’s true both of men and of women."

http://cognitomentoring.org/blog/how-much-does-where-you-go-...

Looking at the earnings of graduates, it doesn't appear that Stanford graduates earn much more than other graduates. It seems like the degree mix the institution awards and the cost of living of the area have the greatest impact on post college earnings. We also need to remember that computer science students comprise just a small portion of the overall student body. http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/full-list...

In regards to the online content, keep in mind that this content has been developed and published with the knowledge that tens of thousands of people will watch it, so it is important to ensure it is of high quality.

In general, I'm really starting to question any reports on salary alone once it gets past $100K/year.

After that point, performance bonuses in their many forms can have such a large impact and that doesn't seem to be represented in salary comparisons.