<p>Yes, it is desirable from a societal point of view that more people are well educated in the liberal arts (including sciences). But, from the point of view of the typical student from a middle income household, that is an external benefit that falls far down in priority when making personal college decisions.</p>
<p>Most of my friends in these majors are perfectly realistic about their job prospects and opportunities, and are making plans to fit the reality. Off the top of my head, I can think of a Theatre major who is planning on going into Art Therapy, a Dance major who’s in grad school for Physical Therapy, and many, many Music/Theatre/Visual Arts majors who plan on going into teaching (and have been getting relevant experience) while they audition/get more experience in their field. Most English majors I know are focused on either teaching or publishing for their eventual careers. </p>
<p>I don’t think it’s possible, especially if you’ve grown up in a family that doesn’t have a ton of money, to NOT be 100% aware of these things. We all know we need to be financially independent as soon as possible after graduation, and everyone I know is doing everything in their power to make that possible, as well as being open to more short-term possibilities like teaching English abroad, nannying, etc.</p>
<p>If anything, what I’ve observed is that it’s the people from more wealthy and well-connected families, who have gotten most of their internships and such via their parents’ connections, who don’t have realistic plans or goals for the years right out of college. They might know that they want to go into a specific field, but usually have no idea what the actual work options for an entry-level position in that field are.</p>
<p>Why do you equate the income of the parents with the income of the student? Upon graduation, our son will start at $0. His education is our last financial gift to him; our income is completely independent of his, and we’ve made sure he has internalized this fact. He will probably be a starving artist, but we hope the world will someday be better for his contribution even if he barely makes a dime.</p>
<p>@epiphany: Thank you for your comments. Perhaps I’m not insane.</p>
<p>re: Creekland’s: The kids who are really in to the fine arts (and similar) majors for college are seldom those who would do well in a STEM field even if they signed up for it. </p>
<p>Really? I used to believe this. Most of the kids that I knew personally in high school (a few decades ago) who majored in music weren’t particularly stellar students. But I think there’s a very strong good-in-music/good-in-math correlation. And if you’re good in math, science is usually easy. The University of Hartford pays out merit scholarships to kids with good SAT scores, but the Hartt School of Music applicants are ineligible for these scholarships because almost all of them would qualify. I meet lots of STEM types (MDs, engineers) who now play at the community level, but are clearly good enough to have majored in music (and some of them double-majored). Maybe they all fall into your “good at everything” category, but I wonder…</p>
<p>I don’t have any stats/references to back up my opinion either.</p>
<p>The student from the lower or middle income household does not have as much of a “parental safety net” to fall back on in case of unanticipated issues at school or finding a job during summers or at graduation. Indeed, if the parents’ financial situation is precarious, the student may feel the need to find a way to earn the money to help his/her parents out of the financial problems that they are in, in addition to paying off any student loans s/he has for college.</p>
<p>In other words, the student from the lower or middle income household is forced to have a higher priority on immediate earning power based on college and major selection, compared to the student from the upper income household.</p>
<p>Also, the wealthier parents are often better connected in terms of helping the student find jobs during summers or at graduation.</p>
<p>With music there is a strong correlation, but not necessarily so with art, theater and many design types of folks. And even a strong correlation doesn’t mean the music lover will love Calculus enough to want to delve into it with the same passion.</p>
<p>Some can do it all. However, most of the top artsy types are not our top calc types. Artsy types often “get” Geometry (even if they don’t care for the “inside the box” part of it), but not necessarily Algebra. (I work in our high school in math and see our graduates each year.)</p>
<p>Ditto that for the English/History crew.</p>
<p>We all have our niches and do best in them.</p>
<p>Feeling the need to assist parents is admirable, but is a self-imposed and unnecessary obligation, one that could be done at any income level regardless of education; just the contribution level may vary. We provide no “parental safety net”; our child will be on his own upon graduation. Because he’s only a sophomore in high school, we’ve also told him that we will make our best attempt to pay for college, but we cannot foresee the future. If he has to take on student loans, he will have to calculate that into his cost of living, but I doubt that will put a dent in the enthusiastic pursuit of his low-paying passion. We will not be there to bail him out.</p>
<p>I think it is. Read Murray’s essay that I linked to or his book “Real Education” and tell me what is wrong with his reasoning. Most of Chapter 3, “Too Many People are Going to College”, is available online at books.google.com .</p>
<p>While I admit I’ve been layed off twice from architecture firms (in 30 years), since I started working on my own in 1998 I’ve always had work. In fact I’ve often had more work during downturns when people couldn’t sell houses and just decided to expand instead. Usually I get to enjoy the holidays, this year it’s been totally crazy. I’ve never had so many new projects in December.</p>
<p>I think it’s also partly a function of where you end up. If my English major sister-in-law hadn’t ended up in semi-rural New Hampshire she probably would have used her degree more. Not that she hasn’t worked - she’s been a children’s librarian, an alternative private high school teacher, a nursery school aide, a substitute teacher, a school bus driver, a journalist for a regional family owned newspaper, a cookbook author, an upholster, and a real estate developer. (Some overlapping jobs here!)</p>
<p>I don’t like the word “useless,” though. Some majors lead more directly to a job than others (my point earlier), but I’m not sure any major is inherently “useless.” The loaded terminology, though eye-catching, is what sets a lot of people on here off. When teaching, I explicitly tell my students that the facts they work so hard to memorize are far less important than the skills they develop through the learning process - reading and critical analysis, group work and collaboration, a grasp of scientific methods and procedures, etc. It’s why academics are perfectly comfortable with courses like “Judge Judy and logic in TV courtroom shows” (Berkeley) or “Learning from Youtube” (Pitzer), while many parents squirm in horror. </p>
<p>*But, from the point of view of the typical student from a middle income household, that is an external benefit that falls far down in priority when making personal college decisions. * So, go for a degree that leads straight to a job. Or specific training programs.</p>
<p>There are no useless majors. Not if you want to be educated, come out a better thinker with deeper and broader knowledge. That’s the key question, to me. Many ways to use the college years wisely.</p>
<p>I guess I should have said, better thinker, analyst, writer, challenge-tested and empowered to go out and use what you have. Plenty of kids sleepwalk through college, eeking through the classes that lead to a degree of some sort, assuming it’s just the degree that matters. I love the ones who get excited, evolve.</p>
<p>I understand a students desire to follow their dream of course. However if the dream is to be a starving artist, do not do so on loans for a high priced education that the rest of us will end up eating when you cannot find employment.</p>
<p>That is true, but what percentage of high school graduates start college? I think that way too many high school students are attending college. It is a disservice to those students who would benefit from true vocational training because they are dissuaded from choosing that route.</p>
<p>Re Murray’s essay (The Bell Curve guy), if more people went to vocational ed school as opposed to college and became electricians, data entry specialists, mechanics etc wouldn’t the value of those certificate go down as the supply of entrants into the field went up?</p>
![http://s1.aecdn.com/images/news/mitt-romney-now-drives-an-audi-q7-52390-7.jpg]Audi](http://s1.aecdn.com/images/news/mitt-romney-now-drives-an-audi-q7-52390-7.jpg%5DAudi){kind=link}
