Critical thinking skills aren’t exclusive to any academic discipline or disciplines. They’re about knowing where a “conclusion” is coming from, what its premises are, under what circumstances those premises are valid, and so on. If all a STEM student knows about something is only a formula or recipe, but not where it comes from, how it came about, what all its limitations are, and why it is what it is, s/he hasn’t really learned it. If s/he pursues these questions, a STEM education actually gives her/him many great advantages in knowing what conclusions are rigorously derived logically or mathematically, what premises are based on and confirmed by rigorous scientific methods. Any “truth” is only as good as its premises, and these premises can’t be taken for granted. Physicists, for example, are still testing the validity of Einstein’s theory of general relativity even after a century of confirmations, hoping to find some tiniest of discrepancies in order to perhaps discover some greater “truth”.
Lots of people have their greatest talent and passion in something that they are still not good enough to make a living in. Some of the most obvious examples that I know are in sports and arts. They obviously have to do something else for a living while pursuing their greatest talents and passions as “extracurriculars”. In a more academic context, many with talent and passion for health care get weeded out of the highly competitive paths to health care (e.g. most pre-meds do not get into any medical school, while nursing programs are often highly competitive for primary or secondary admission).
Others people have their greatest talent in passion in something that they can make a living in and are good at, but not elite at.
By definition, elite level talent and passion in anything is uncommon. Is it a correct assumption any person (e.g. your kid) necessarily has enough talent and passion in something that they will be elite in for school and career?
It is a mistake to say that engineering and CS graduates cannot read, synthesize, analyze, or write.
What can really be the issue in industry downturns is that:
- Engineering and CS graduates prefer engineering and CS jobs, rather than general BA/BS jobs that they have less or no interest in.
- Employers of general BA/BS jobs may feel that any engineering or CS graduate applying for the job is only looking for a short term job until their industry recovers.
Note that the above can affect other majors (e.g. including liberal arts majors like biology and chemistry as well as other preprofessional majors like architecture and nursing), though it is probably even more of an issue for more specialized variants (e.g. computer game design, sports management).
Apparently, most college students do not share that view, since most bachelor’s degrees in the US are granted in overtly preprofessional majors. Given the high cost of college education borne by the student and parents, it is not surprising that there is at least some emphasis on preprofessional aspects when choosing colleges and majors.
Of course, post-BA/BS professional school can be very expensive, so that may not be much of an option for many.
Very few people were elite enough in high school to get into those preferred recruiting grounds (where they often major in economics, the usual business -substitute major).
Was nephew #1 at a well known college?
This is an incorrect conclusion to draw. Financial institutions are primarily in the intermediation business, selling financial products and services. They want smart people, but more importantly, they want people who can sell these products and services. The ability to connect and sell isn’t enhanced by one’s major. In a few areas where some of these financial institutions need people with quantitative skills, they look for people with those skills. The quantitative skills developed in STEM disciplines are highly hierarchical, and these firms wouldn’t be able to teach new hires such skills as they could with other skills needed in their businesses.
Let’s remember the focus of this post, which is to discover if parents suggested their kids seek degrees leading to higher paid jobs.
And yes, my husband and I both suggested to our son that he aim for a degree that might lead to a higher paid job, but that’s because he stated at the start of college that he wants to be rich and he planned to transfer into the business school.
Well, after a summer internship doing a desk job at a wealth management company, he realized that type of work is not for him. So he’s planning to finish his degree and and figure out some other way to get rich. But he mostly is interested in any type of job that keeps him from sitting behind a desk. He’s currently exploring firefighting, oil rig working, and perhaps the military. Not necessarily ways to get rich, but certainly a lot of other benefits.
I agree with you. I don’t think engineering grads are any worse off than liberal arts grad in a downturn.
This is what I’ve observed from my engineering classmates and my spouse’s classmates and colleagues. So hundreds of classmates. A small fraction go into academia and they generally have very satisfying careers. A nice $ bonus is the ability to consult and some engineering profs get paid better than others.
The engineers who end up in top tech (management) jobs were not the best students, not the worst. They had good technical skills and good management skills and luck. Climbed the ladder fast, switched companies at the right time.
A fair number are successful entrepreneurs, some in tech related fields, others not - but having strong quantitative and problem solving skills helps. I don’t know whether a greater percentage of my classmates are entrepreneurs vs. liberal arts majors from the same school.
Others settled long ago into government jobs, and are almost retired never having left.
The remainder are senior-ish technical people in diff. firms.
I would say that the vast majority of my classmates have not been unemployed. The salary surveys (from my U) indicate that the engineering grads have done better financially. But it’s hard to compare apples to apples because the engineering faculty at my U attracted much stronger students. So I am sure that top SLAC/Ivy/T20 liberal arts grads do better than my engineering classmates.
I understand when parents worry and push kids into engineering because it seems that the “average” kid does ok and stays employed.
That’s another interesting topic! Discover yourself in 20s or build career and how that affects family formation (especially for women).
I have friends in both groups. One group seems markedly less tired now in early 50s/late 40s. Married college sweetheart, built careers, saved like mad to buy house, had kids in short interval. Kids out of house by age 50 and in college. These friends are now retired, part-time work, working, going on holidays. Overall, more relaxed.
I think it varies by the kid. For kids that have clarity (and I have both kinds), the early start is less expensive.
Parent of PhD in music here. I never dissuaded them. At the time of undergrad application, we certainly felt an undergrad music major (BA) did not limit future options, including professional grad schools. However, COVID has greatly impacted the field. This kid has been teaching for two years as an Instructor, but university level teaching jobs in the humanities have declined. I think this thread provides an explanation for that decline. Kid is applying to a wide variety of jobs and was careful to do internships, organize events and curate during the last decade to build skills.
Which raises an interesting point I think. Job prospects are not always about major/degree. In some cases, jobs want “equivalent experience” or relevant skills, which can be obtained through internships, volunteering and jobs.
Other kids: one in CS, predictable since toddler years. One was a dancer who switched to psychology. Latter kid has learning challenges and bipolar 1 (anyone else? this thread is kind of intimidating in terms of level of functioning and success), and is graduating at age 30 after taking one or two classes at a time. I really don’t care what their major is. I am so proud of them for finishing. (Just introducing a little of the reality many families deal with here).
There is movement in the music field to extend access to those who do not have the resources formerly required for success in music (years of lessons, conservatory prep). This is happening in the academic context and also with grants, awards, residencies and other opportunities. The hope is that parents who are not wealthy, can then support a degree in music without so much financial anxiety.
One thought - my generation of parents seem pushier than the parents of my generation.
It was the rare classmate that said their parents pushed them into it. Only a small fraction of us had a parent who was an engineer.
Fast forward to now - I found out that one class of engineers at my alma mater is almost 50% kids of alums.
My generation of parents is worried about a vanishing middle class, more foreign competition, and great income inequality. My parents’ generation was confident their children would do better than they did; few share that confidence now.
Yes, that is a good explanation.
My husband and I are both engineers. Our oldest never graduated from college due to his mental illness. Our middle kid majored in English and at 27 does not have a job. Our youngest majored in photography and art history and is doing pretty well. She photographs food for our local supermarket chain, has a part time job at Maine’s largest art museum, and is renting studio space with a close friend so she can do some free-lancing. DH and I definitely had to hold our tongues, but we never suggested the kids study engineering or another higher-paying degree. Middle kid will find his way - he’s the one in Warsaw, Poland. He’s OK for now since his fiancee is working for Google. He really doesn’t care about money except to have enough to live on. He wants to help other people.
Curious what this means? (“elite or bust”)
My D is interested in the same field as me - I’ve encouraged her to explore other fields - just because she might be good at/enjoy something she hasn’t seen and doesn’t know anything about.
I’m probably going to get flamed here. This is anecdata, and I have only a small set of experiences.
-
I know hundreds of engineers, practicing and non practicing. Nobody really bemoans their education, even those who leave the profession. So it’s almost like there’s no bust. No harm in doing engineering undergrad. I don’t know any heavily indebted engineering grad, maybe different otherwise. As far as pushing their kids towards STEM, yes, many of them do. A small minority (like me) don’t but do encourage keeping up math as long as is feasible.
-
Living in a performing arts-rich city, I have met 4 types of artists with children.
– Those like Olivia Colman who have achieved great renown and financial security and state that they could not have done anything else and appreciated the freedom to pursue their performing arts BA.
– I have met moderately successful artists who gripe about having to look for gigs, have families, are not with financially secure partners who can help - one even went so far as to dissuade their kids from performing arts BA.
–I have met people with undergrad performing arts majors who have not achieved success, hate what they do to pay bills and also dissuade their kids from performing arts BA.
– the last being the category of people who cannot make a living being an artist but are happy living a very modest life pursuing something adjacent and keeping up the auditioning forever.
Could the 3rd category of artists be considered a bust (in a small limited way)?
It means a field where only the elite can make a living in it (although it may be a very good living).
An example would be sports. More academic examples would be physician or tenured university faculty.
PS - yes, i know Colman does not have performing arts BA.
I don’t know any board qualified physician who does not make an upper middle class salary.
But I know there are heavily indebted doctors who struggle.