<p>
</p>
<p>It’s actually a BS degree from Haas. True, business administration is not a science (however much business school professors may claim otherwise), yet the fact remains that Haas grants BS degrees. </p>
<p>[Course</a> Information, Undergraduate Program - Haas School of Business, University of California Berkeley](<a href=“Academics - Undergraduate Program - Berkeley Haas”>Academics - Undergraduate Program - Berkeley Haas)</p>
<p>
There are exceptions to every rule, but let’s be honest here. It’s pretty damn difficult to get hired as a financial analyst with a degree in (music) history.</p>
<p>
I was using BA as short for “Business Administration” not “Bachelor of Arts”. Sorry for the confusion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have a better idea. He can apply and be admitted to a high-ranked MBA program, such as UCLA Anderson, right out of undergrad.</p>
<p>Or, how about another option? He can immediately become an investment associate at a leading private wealth management firm such as, say, Fisher Investments. A few years of doing that and he will surely be competitive for admission to the top MBA programs in the world.</p>
<p>Are these options ridiculously unworkable? Then somebody forgot to tell some former Berkeley history graduates, for that is precisely what they did. Granted, they weren’t music history graduates specifically, as Berkeley doesn’t even offer such a major, nevertheless, I think the point stands. </p>
<p><a href=“https://career.berkeley.edu/Major2006/Hist.stm[/url]”>https://career.berkeley.edu/Major2006/Hist.stm</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Regarding Berkeley, the answer that immediately comes to mind is that the person didn’t get into the Haas bus-ad major. Let’s face it, not everybody gets in. Those people who don’t get in may still want to eventually earn MBA’s, yet will still have to major in something.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t even think it is an exception to any particular rule, when you consider the fact that, before the crash, nearly half of all Harvard graduates who entered the workforce took jobs in finance or consulting. Clearly not all of them were economics or engineering majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nah, that’s clearly false. I’ve known plenty of engineers who have entered top B-schools who not only lack any true ‘business’ (as opposed to engineering) experience, but, by their own admission, have never really accomplished anything particularly impressive on their jobs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you consider somebody like Christopher Wilson-Byrne to be really exceptional?</p>
<p>[Chris</a> Wilson-Byrne - Profile Detail - MBA - Harvard Business School](<a href=“http://www.hbs.edu/mba/perspectives/students/2009/cwilsonbyrne.html]Chris”>http://www.hbs.edu/mba/perspectives/students/2009/cwilsonbyrne.html)</p>
<p>Or how about Blake Gottesman, who never even graduated from college at all?. Of course I suppose being well-connected to the Bush family, and being Jenna Bush’s former high school boyfriend, didn’t hurt.</p>
<p>[Bush?s</a> Personal Aide To Enroll at Business School | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2006/5/22/bushs-personal-aide-to-enroll-at/]Bush?s”>Bush’s Personal Aide To Enroll at Business School | News | The Harvard Crimson)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Generally because the ‘amazing jobs’ of which this thread seems to be focused upon - that is to say the jobs at the elite consulting and finance firms - are generally understood to be assignments that last only a few years, after which the top percentile will be offered promotion to the associate ranks but the overwhelming majority will terminated and expected to do something else, which usually tends to be an MBA program. This is an arrangement that is understood by all parties right from the very beginning. Those firms know full well that you are unlikely to be anything more than a temporary hire, and plan accordingly.</p>
<p>Business majors are on average far less likely to continue their education beyond the bachelor’s degree. A detailed study of college graduates in 1992/93 found that five years later, only 16% had obtained a post-graduate degree, compared to 30% for all majors. I would assume almost all of this 16% went on to get an MBA or a related master’s degree in business. </p>
<p>I am pretty sure more than just about any major, where you do your undergrad matters, and there’s quite a big difference whether you go to a non-elite school vs. “the select” (i.e. Haas, Wharton, Stern, etc.) I imagine a much higher percentage of grads of these schools go on to get MBA’s than say, Marist College, Northeastern Illinois University or San Diego State.</p>
<p>A much higher % of students at more elite colleges and universities major in liberal arts, while at nonelite schools students tend to major in more “vocational” subjects (including marketing and business administration as well as elementary education, certain health sciences, criminal justice, etc.) So when we hear about top MBA programs taking lots of liberal arts majors, this may actually be a factor and I imagine graduates of Wharton, Stern, Haas et. al. aren’t at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>OTOH, I had a friend from high school who was passionate about studying history in college, but was pressured by his parents to major in something “practical” and went into business in a top UG program. He soon became very passionate about becoming a millionaire before 30 and loved to ridicule liberal arts majors as being “useless.” I remember soon after he became quite irate about liberal arts majors getting MBAs (“through the back door”). He thought it was totally unfair that people who decided to do an elite business program at 18 had to do “remedial” business education when they started the MBA, at the same level as the non-business majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is possible to double major in history and something with better career prospects like math or computer science.</p>
<p>Indeed, some of the humanities and social studies, while being poor for career prospects by themselves, may be useful supporting subjects for certain types of careers.</p>
<p>Absolutely. Most people who go onto law school are social science and humanities grads.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Much of that has to do with the fact that social science and humanities majors hand out the higher grades that law school adcoms demand. Let’s face it - if you earn a 2.5 GPA in EECS, you’re not going to be admitted to any decent law school. Law school adcoms don’t really care that some majors are graded more harshly than others, all they really care about is that you have high grades.</p>
<p>^Sigh. I don’t think that’s the case.</p>
<p>I mean, think about how ridiculous that sounds. Since when is “Because I did not want to major in EECS” a reason for declaring a humanities or social science major? I’m sick of this EECS is holier than thou mentality that is so prevalent at Berkeley.</p>
<p>First of all, computer science and engineering departments at other schools (i.e. not just Berkeley) are not necessarily graded as strictly (supposedly) as Berkeley’s departments are.</p>
<p>The “hard” (I use the term loosely) majors vary from school to school.</p>
<p>Anyways, I’m sure there are a good number of comp sci majors who go on to law school.</p>
<p>Secondly, future law students tend to be interested in reading, writing, analyzing writing, logic, people, psychology, etc. That’s it. That’s the reason. It has nothing to do with GPA. If EECS handed out as many A’s as humanities/social science majors (which, by the way, I don’t think the difference is all that substantial), I guarantee you there still wouldn’t be very many pre-law EECS majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, when did I ever say that it was? </p>
<p>All I simply said is that law school adcoms care predominantly about grades and care relatively little about the difficulty of obtaining those grades. The (sad) upshot is that if you want to attend a top law school, you should avoid difficult majors with difficult grading. I believe this point had been well established in a recent thread from a Berkeley senior who was recently admitted to HLS who sadly agreed that this was indeed a viable strategy. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, but we’re not talking about those other schools. At least, I wasn’t. I was talking specifically about Berkeley. After all, this is the Berkeley section of CC. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure, but there would be more than there are now. That’s the point. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It doesn’t? Are you sure? </p>
<p>*A lot of people encourage college freshmen to “survey their intellectual horizons” during their undergraduate career. That’s fine, if you’re a legitimate polymath, or if you don’t care about your GPA. I knew I was a good writer, so I took English classes. I did fine in my breadths, but my major GPA is almost flawless because I majored in something I was good at. A lot of people come in as freshmen thinking “god it would be sweet to learn something about nuclear engineering, later highschool!” Once again, that’s fine, but remember that you will NEVER be able to wipe that C off of your transcript when you apply to law schools/graduate schools/professional schools. *</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-berkeley/886027-ask-scholar-cynic-optimist-harvard-law-bound-cal-student-2.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-berkeley/886027-ask-scholar-cynic-optimist-harvard-law-bound-cal-student-2.html</a></p>
<p>*If you know you are going to be entering into law school, make sure your GPA from your undergraduate years is a high one. *</p>
<p>[How</a> LSAT And GPA Is Weighted In Law School Admissions | LSAT Tips](<a href=“http://www.lsattips.com/law-schools-admissions/lsat-gpa-law-school-admissions/]How”>http://www.lsattips.com/law-schools-admissions/lsat-gpa-law-school-admissions/)</p>
<p>Umm, I’m not saying that pre-law students don’t want a good GPA. Of course GPA is important. I just don’t think that this is the primary reason why there aren’t many pre-law EECS students.</p>
<p>And sorry you thought we were only talking about Berkeley. I thought by now it was pretty clear we were talking about grad schools, MBA programs, law schools, etc. across the nation.</p>
<p>Of course it’s a good strategy to look for a major that will provide you with a high GPA. Again, I just don’t think that this is the main reason why EECS is unpopular with pre-law students.</p>
<p>Anyways, I don’t think the thoughts of that one poster in that one thread speak for all law students. I highly doubt any of them would say that they were so excited to major in comp sci as an undergraduate, only to have their dreams crushed by the fact that law schools look at your GPA (gasp!).</p>
<p>People choose a major usually because it’s what they’re most interested in / what they’re best at. For law students, that usually includes heavy reading/writing. For EECS students, that includes techy stuff and definitely not reading/writing. Yes GPA is a huge factor, but for the most part, except those who may be interested in Intellectual Property Law, EECS lawyers are definitely rare.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But that doesn’t change the outcome. A 2.5 GPA from any undergrad school will make it difficult for you to be admitted to any graduate program. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obviously not, because prelaws, or at least the savvier ones, will specifically choose not to major in subjects in which they are unlikely to earn top grades - or are perceived as such. I believe it is well understood that if you want to be competitive for the top law schools, you need high grades, and the fact is, certain majors are more difficult than others.</p>
<p>I knowwwwwwww. I just don’t think lawyers are interested in engineering! :P</p>
<p>Nobody is disputing that most engineers are not interested in becoming lawyers. Nevertheless, some are. Yet they can’t do it because they don’t have the necessary grades. </p>
<p>On the other hand, I am sure that many students in creampuff majors are not interested in becoming lawyers either. But some are - and they can do so far more readily than can their CS counterparts because of their (easily obtained) high grades.</p>
<p>Honestly, there’s no point in arguing something you’re not familiar with. Do some serious research on the fields that you are pursuing(as in not CC forums). I’m not quite sure why you’re asking a question on this topic if you already have such firm opinions.</p>
<p>Well 1) we’re not arguing, we’re “discussing” :), and 2) we’re not talking about my original question anymore. :P</p>
<p>I don’t have “firm” opinions, I’m just talking it out. It’s a discussion forum.</p>
<p>But I guess we should probably get back on topic.</p>
<p>And for the record, I did do serious research! That’s why I posted my original question, I wanted to see what others thought. I’m not unfamiliar with this topic.</p>