I agree there are certainly exceptions. Some kids may truly (not merely) and equally excel at both. For the vast majority of kids, I still think it’s pretty easy to tell which direction they’re leaning. Their left and right brains aren’t developing at the same rates.
Students can certainly have myriad of interests. But if their talent leans in one direction, it should help them narrow down their choices. For example, if they aren’t very good with math, they shouldn’t major in a highly quantitative field, including most areas of CS and some areas of econ, even though they may not have taken any classes in those subjects.
D21 had no specific career interests when applying to colleges. She has strengths in math & science but didn’t gravitate towards any related careers in those areas. She settled on applying to business programs with the understanding that she could take freshman year to explore any other degree options that her university offered and if desired, change her major. In the meantime, the field of business allows for exposure to many analytical, creative and entrepreneurial pursuits. She has decided to settle in as a finance major - in part because she sees the success that her older sister has had in this field (as well as many other recent college grad friends), and she realizes that 3 years from now, she will need to be able to support herself financially.
I doubt she’ll ever have a “passion” for finance and that’s fine. I think the term is over-used (kind of like “soulmate”) and can create unrealistic expectations for those who never feel deeply connected to their career. I was interested in my career and enjoyed it most days but would not describe being passionate about it. There are plenty of things in life to be passionate about, other than one’s job.
My older daughter doesn’t have a passion for finance either, but she has set financial and career advancement goals for herself. The ability to work in a field where she can be a high achiever and be compensated accordingly, feeds her passion to reach those goals and be acknowledged for her hard work.
Our son had real passions from the time he was in middle school, so even though he eventually jumped from one to the other, we never worried that he would wander aimlessly in college, but we never expected any payback or ever thought about his schooling in financial terms. His education was our no-strings gift to study whatever he wanted, but we were clear that his education would be our last financial gift to him.
That he also had a love of tanks focused/limited his college choices. That the tank college would not cost us anything was an unexpected bonus.
On another note, I brought up this thread with DH the other day, specifically the conversation about not/loving what you do and how I never had a passion for anything or I’d be pursuing it in retirement. He looked at me with surprise and commented that I’ve been doing some type of writing all my life and that I parlayed my Phi Beta Kappa English degree into the tech career I did partly due to my writing and communications skills. He also reminded me that during the ten years I spent at one global tech company in Boston, I wrote an internal Dilbert-like humor column that was sadly missed when I left. He also mentioned that I’ve probably watched “A Stupid and Futile Gesture” as many times as I have because that is the calling I missed. This makes me sad because it’s probably true, but that boat has long sailed.
People on this forum do so love to look down upon/roll their eyes at the “Tiger Parents”, especially immigrants. While I agree a single mindedness to push kids to Ivies+ and high paying/prestigious jobs is unhealthy and misplaced, let’s take a look at the genesis of this drive and maybe consider a few things that those of who grew up middle/upper middle/privileged never really had to confront.
Both my parents grew up in war, and while their families avoided homelessness and extreme poverty, food and shelter were at real risk. Their opportunities in their home country were limited, and my dad was fortunate enough to get a scholarship to attend graduate school in the US. Times and money were still tight as my brother and I grew up and education was prioritized by my parents as our means to get ahead. Coming from a world where which college you attended mattered, my parents of course hoped my brother and I could be admitted to Ivy type colleges, although it wasn’t an Ivy or bust mentality. Saving and building a nest egg were emphasized. I still have a bowl of silver quarters and dimes because unlike my friends, I did not spend my weekly allowance on candy and knick knacks but secured it in my piggy bank. My brother and I both ended up at selective colleges and professional schools (doctor and lawyer), not so much because our parents forced us, but because our circumstances guided us in directions where security in income was a priority. I think a lot of the immigrant parents so roundly criticized/looked down upon on these pages come from similar circumstances where they believe with all their heart that education and financial security are paramount in the interests of their kids. Their understanding of the US system may be misinformed.
While my kids grew up privileged in the sense of family income security, we tried our best to create an environment where more was earned and less was given. They both were told early on that they would get college of their choice fully paid for, but after that they were off the payroll. We have not pushed or even suggested majors or careers. They have made practical choices in line with their interests. Even though S makes 6 figures at a BBB in NYC, he still spends a part of Sunday afternoon making lunch boxes for the rest of the week to save $100/week (and eating healthier) vs ordering in.
As @lettiriggi commented above, crap unfortunately happens in life: layoff, mental or physical illness, physical injury, natural disaster. Unless you have built a good nest egg and/or an easily transportable skill (or deep pocketed parents), people are closer to financial disaster than they realize. Nothing wrong with doing what you love which may not be a high paying. Fancy cars, big house, exotic vacations are not necessary for happiness, but if you are not working in a field that allows you to save enough to tide your family through 0 income for at least 1 year by the time you are 30, to me that is an irresponsible path/risk.
100% agree that growing up in a household where parents fled war (mine did too), that the conversation is different. And that shapes us as parents too. We’ve always told our D the same thing about saving for layoff/injury/disaster and needing to be financially conservative, especially when you are first starting off.
My nephew was like that, he had 3 majors, biology, Japanese, and I forgot the third one,maybe literature. His grade suffered in college, he had to apply twice to get into medical school. Luckily he’s employed as a doctor, but he likes video games a lot too.
Not immigrants, but parents were young adults in the Great Depression. No wonder they were cautious and did not share the optimism of some that everything would work out. They knew from experience it often did not.
I totally get what you have said in your post, and come from a similar background. The importance of being prepared for the worst was drilled into me (perhaps too much). I have done well for myself, though not as well many parents on this forum–definitely not a full pay family here!
But your last sentence would seem to preclude a lot of necessary careers, including doctor (due to length of time in training), teachers, social workers, etc. Am I missing something?
There is dignity of labor. Most jobs are needed by society and one absolutely should not look down upon on another job. At the same time one has no obligation to do the job oneself
Well I certainly don’t look down on any job, and I myself could never be a doctor or a teacher. Just not how I’m wired. Really, nobody is required to choose a particular job, whether low or high paying. I was just interested in @BKSquared thoughts on my comment.
30 was a general proxy, maybe something like 5 years after graduation accounts for graduate/professional school. As far as teachers, social workers, other lower paying careers, benefits are part of the equation, but my point is that a lower paying career is fine, but that means you have to adjust your lifestyle to allow some level of savings. It would be the height of financial irresponsibility to incur huge debt to work in a low paying sector. See this article: USC Pushed a $115,000 Online Degree. Graduates Got Low Salaries, Huge Debts. - WSJ
In these circumstances, you are basically asking your family, taxpayers or someone else to take on the risk of a decision you made. Choices have consequences, and all I am saying is that people need to understand the risks of the choices they make and be prepared for the consequences rather than assume it will all turn out or someone will bail them out.
Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. Perhaps I was interpreting your original post too literally.
Agree one should make informed choices, and be willing to accept the tradeoffs.
ETA: I have heard about that USC degree. It’s practically criminal. There’s got to be a better way of educating people about debt…but those pushing the debt have absolutely no incentive to do so. That’s a topic for another thread…
I agree. My son is a STEM kid and always gravitated toward classes and ECs that fit his interests (Science Olympiad, FIRST Robotics, science electives, etc.) He applied to MechE programs largely because it was the most competitive major in which he was interested. He is also interested in BioChem and BioMed, and I would not be surprised if he changed majors, or had a double major or minor. That said, he writes very well and draws beautifully, both of which he does outside of school.
I disagree with you about the government, and many families living within their financial constraints, but that is fodder for another thread.
There was a common progression at CMU when I was there in the 1980s: Freshman - EE, Sophomore - CIvE, Junior - Public Policy or Econ (the business school had a separate, and very competitive, admissions process so it wasn’t the dumping ground for failed engineers).
Well put. My parents also saw it as their responsibility to help out others in their extended family financially. We’ve been lucky (over used word) to not be as constrained as they were, and our children are even less constrained. But I understand very well the circumstances that make parents push their kids towards more financially rewarding careers.
I don’t think it is that bad at all :-). I think some 98% of my engg batch (back when) made it. Few in my son’s batch are dropping, if any. I think if you picked a hard major like Math that’s a different matter though. Even here kids only slide from pure math to applied.