Do NOT major in engineering!

College Majors Engineering Majors
61

<p>

</p>

<p>Then I guess you and I have very different definition of what it means to be “done”. Most people would rather not spend 4-5 years and $40,000+ just to study what they love and have the same job prospects they did as a high school graduate, and in many cases, their job prospects are worse now than they were before. Almost no one in their right mind would do 8+ years (bachelors and PhD) along with all the debt associated with it just to start from high school and go through the educational process of retraining for the type of work they want. </p>

<p>Also, MBA is worthless for anyone who doesn’t have any work experience and isn’t working in finance or engineering. You can’t realistically expect to be managing people in your field when you can’t even get a job in it in the first place. That’s the reality the vast majority of graduates in fields outside of engineering are having to deal with. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This wouldn’t be a problem if high school guidance counselors did their jobs and schools produced employment statistics that are not misleading. Most college graduates have no idea that they’re job prospects are about as good as they were back when they graduated high school until it is too late. If more college students were aware of this reality and not actively deceived by society at large, then there would be no problem. However, I’d think a lot of schools would close down due to a lack of funds as only those who truly want education for the sake of education would attend. Tuition would also drop to more realistic and affordable levels. </p>

62

<p>

Last year Georgetown published a study that compare the unemployment rate and salary for new grads, experienced workers, and graduate degree holders in varied majors. They found that new grads without graduate degrees in most STEM and pre-professional majors had a lower unemployment rate than new grads in engineering and CS. Engineering fields topped the salary for bachelor’s degree holders, as expected, but there are plenty of other options to make a decent income with as low unemployment for new grads. Specific numbers they list for new grads in a wide variety of majors are below:</p>

<p>Nursing - 4.8% unemployment, $48k starting salary
Chemistry - 5.8% unemployment, $31k starting salary
Finance - 5.9% unemployment, $44k starting salary
Mathematics - 5.9% unemployment, $41k starting salary
Civil Engineering - 7.6% unemployment, $51k starting salary
Liberal Arts - 8.1% unemployment, $31k starting salary
Mechanical Engineering - 8.1% unemployment, $57k starting salary
Computer Science - 8.7% unemployment, $50k starting salary</p>

<p>Among graduate degree holders, several other fields rivaled or even exceeded engineering salaries. Examples are below. The list does not compensate for differences in types of degrees, such as a higher frequency of MS degrees in engineering being compared to a higher frequency of PhD in certain stem fields.</p>

<p>Mathematics - $87k
Civil Engineering - $95k
Computer Science - $97k
Biology - $97k
Physics - $97k
Finance - $98k
Chemistry - $99k
Mechanical Engineering - $101k
Economics - $102k</p>

<p>To many, salary isn’t everything. Many would choose a job in a field they enjoy over a 20% higher salary in a field that makes them miserable. I mentioned that I started a successful Internet company earlier in the thread. There was a very sharp increase in income when the company took off. At first, the extra income seemed like a way to fulfill long term dreams. I bought many well thought out expensive things such as a 7-figure home, exotic cars, etc. It was nice for awhile, but eventually I learned that money does not equate well to contentment after reaching a basic threshold, and there are more important things than trying to have a lot of money when you die. I also found that the income had changed my personality, in a way I thought was undesirable. So I started focusing more on doing what I enjoyed, and less on doing what led to the highest income. I work a lot fewer hours now and I make a lot less income, but I am more content with my life. I’d expect a similar statement could be many who follow their passions and work in fields with less salary potential than engineering.</p>

63

<p>1) by “done” I meant doomed to permanent lack of subsistence, Basically. I don;t know what you mean by it. But please don’t explain again.
2) job prospects are frequently not worse than before, since a bachelor’s degree is often a listed requirement for many jobs, and HR departments will screen out non-compliant resumes.
3) MBA has utility for landing positions in more fields and industries than you are aware of, evidently. You can look it up if interested.
4) This is a silly discussion that is not helping any kid select a college, so I’m done here, ta-ta.</p>

64

<p>^^^Ok so saying money doesn’t matter is kind of ridiculous in your situation^^^</p>

<p>I think if you knew a little more about money and the things you stated are true, you could definitely be retired by now^. SOO money does matter and knowledge of it definitely does. With that 7 figures you could have made at least 6 figures by now and be pulling in 6 figures a year while sitting in Santa Barabara with a maragarita.</p>

<p>If retiring some day means anything to you I would definitely say money means a lot! I want to start a business, make a few million, invest and retire by 35. Then I can do whatever the hell I want to do. Hey, 60 is the new 40 these days!</p>

65

<p>

</p>

<p>This is not the case. The high school diploma has been so devalued these days that many jobs where a college degree is not required from a skills standpoint require or prefer applicants with a college degree, as a signal that the applicant was able to complete a college degree.</p>

<p>Granted, that is not particularly efficient for the high school graduate who has no particular need from a skills standpoint or desire to go to college, but finds job opportunities and advancement limited by not having one.</p>

<p>Of course, there are well paid skilled jobs that do not require a bachelor’s degree. But they generally do require some post-high-school education to get started on learning the skills.</p>

66

<p>

I didn’t say money doesn’t matter. I said, </p>

<p>“To many, salary isn’t everything. Many would choose a job in a field they enjoy over a 20% higher salary in a field that makes them miserable.”</p>

<p>“I work a lot fewer hours now and I make a lot less income, but I am more content with my life. I’d expect a similar statement could be many who follow their passions and work in fields with less salary potential than engineering.”</p>

<p>

Have you ever seen the movie Office Space? At one point a character who is unsatisfied with his job in a tech field asks something to the effect of, if you were retired and could do whatever the hell you wanted, what would you choose? Then he explains, if you choose a career similar to what you enjoy doing for fun, then the work is enjoyable. They give comedic answers, but there is some truth to the idea. Some do find careers that they enjoy and are passionate about for various reason and do not fantasize about some day being able to quit their job and spend their days relaxing, sipping margaritas, and not accomplishing anything of significance. For example, I used to date a woman who was really passionate about all the people she helped through her work at a non-profit that assists homeless veterans in my area get back on their feet and really made a difference in their lives. She didn’t have a high income, but she appeared to be quite happy to go in to work each day and appeared to be content with her career choices. She had received higher paying job offers in private fields in the past, yet chose the non-profit. If she won the mega-millions lottery and could comfortably retire, I’d expect she’d continue to work with the organization and would use a good chunk of the lottery money to provide greater assistance to their cause. </p>

<p>Of course not everyone finds a career they enjoy, but I wouldn’t recommend choosing engineering just because starting salary with a bachelor’s is higher than other majors. Some do genuinely enjoy engineering type problem solving and do enjoy seeing their ideas & designs come to life, including myself. Others would be miserable doing most types of engineering jobs. Is being miserable during ~half of your waking hours on weekdays really worth a ##% increase in starting salary over a field that you’d truly enjoy, or at least one you wouldn’t hate?</p>

67

<p>31k as a chemist after a four year education? Is following your passion in chemistry really worth having to most likely take a temp job with no benefits?</p>

<p>I know for a FACT getting by on 31k right now is NOT easy. There is no way I would recommend somebody to follow their passion if that is how far they have to sell themself short. </p>

68

<p>@aGGieENGiNeeR‌ : I’m currently living on what is equivalent to $36,000 salary as an intern in a HIGH cost of living large city and doing fine (aka, saving >half of my salary in a savings account or retirement account). You just need to be smart on money. </p>

<p>Chemists need Masters or PHds to make money as they are a highly technical field. And you need to chose the right area of study in Chemistry (parents are both chemists). </p>

69

<p>I never said it could not be done. I said it is not easy. I currently have an internship paying 40k a year in a low cost of living area, but I hope to never have to be in this position when I graduate. </p>

<p>Even on my 40k, federal income tax + SS/medicare is taking 28%. Therefore, that puts me at 28,800. 400 dollars rent per month, $4800, leaving me at 24,000. Now let’s factor car insurance, health insurance, gasoline to get to work, Utility bill, cell phone bill, and food. These are things that are simply necessary expenses. This is enough to support the lifestyle of going to work, coming home, eating, and going to bed. That’s no T.V. or internet even considered. About the only fun I can have is read a book.</p>

<p>I’m not complaining about my situation. I’m gaining great experience so that my future will be much brighter. However, an average chemist with a bachelors and no possible way of getting to grad school will be stuck in that lifestyle I have stated above. This is why passion is important, but is not everything.</p>

70

<p>

</p>

<p>This just can’t be right. I want to see a source. And I want to see the sources sources. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sure, but really, we’re not talking about a difference of 20%. It’s a no brainier at that point. We’re talking about upwards of 100%. It’s not a no brainier at that point. </p>

71

<p>After taxes and pretax deductions (401k), I usually have ~30-35% taken off, so let’s say annually I have 24,000.
$1,200 for monthly passes for public transportation. $7,800 for housing and utilities (multiple roommates, housemates). $2,000 for food. ~$240 a year for cell phone (dumb phone, could make it lower).</p>

<p>Leaves me with $12,760. Put ~$5000 in Roth IRA. Leaves me with $7760, which equals $646 extra a month. </p>

<p>I’m also eyeing that 95k civil engineering salary with a bit of distrust… You usually see that salary a few years into the job, even with a graduate degree. </p>

72

<p>

A link to the Georgetown study results is at <a href=“Box”>https://georgetown.app.box.com/s/9t0p5tm0qhejyy8t8hub&lt;/a&gt; , which also describes their methodology . The numbers are a few years old, so salaries are probably a bit higher today. To convert to 2014 dollars, multiply by ~1.08 .</p>

<p>Regarding computer science, the starting salary listed on Payscale is $58k, which seems reasonably close to the Georgetown study value of $50k. After multiplying by 1.08, it becomes $54k vs $58k, which could be easily be explained by a selection bias in who chooses to report their salary on Payscale. The results for civil engineering are similar. The study reports an experienced grad civil engineering salary of $81k or $87k in 2014 dollars. Payscale reports $89k, again only a minor difference that can be explained by selection bias. Unfortunately I do not have an alternative source for unemployment rate of new grads by major.</p>

73

<p>Hm, they don’t list the response rate of the results, or break down between masters and PHds. Unfortunately, my college’s career office’s website is getting updated and I can’t find our info at the time to compare. I just looked at UIUC, but their results don’t separate the different fields of engineering as far as I can tell. </p>

<p>Oh, you said “experienced grad.” Usually civil engineers get a big pay bump after 5-10 years of experience, due to various licensing (PE/SE) and increasing from Engineer 1 level. But entry level salaries usually don’t get as nice as 95k. </p>

74

<p>Going back to the original post:</p>

<p><a href=“1.”>quote</a> You will, I repeat, will work much harder than your non engineering peers for lower grades.

[/quote]

With rare exceptions, the mean GPA difference between engineering and the university as a whole is typically around 0.1, occasionally 0.2. Yes, you will work harder, but how much harder depends on a lot of things - I finished my degree as a married father of one, working 20 hours a week on the side, and I still had time for fun. If it is too much work for you, then that is your choice, but don’t act like it is impossible. And definitely don’t go to ANY grad program with this attitude.</p>

<p><a href=“2.”>quote</a> You will have a much harder time getting into graduate school with that low GPA mentioned above. Sure some kids will pull through the program with a 3.5+, but these are already the best of the best.

[/quote]

First of all, med school, business school, and law school are all professional programs - research programs in your major are no issue at all. Second, those professional schools still admit a lot of engineers (not med school as much, but then, engineering is not really good med school prep anyway!) - I have several friends who went from engineering to either a JD or MBA. Third, 3.5+ GPA is typically the top 20-25% of engineering students - we are not exactly talking about impossible territory.</p>

<p><a href=“3.”>quote</a> Your starting salary will not be all that different from anyone else’s, and your salary down the line will likely be lower. You may start out at $60,000 while your friend in finance or marketing starts at $55,000 or even more.

[/quote]

Averages indicate a greater gap than $5k, so on average if you are seeing that then it suggests that your friend was working harder than you were. Regardless, a $5k difference in salary, across a career, us about quarter million dollars ignoring interest. If that isn’t worth working a bit harder for a few years, then sure, don’t do it. Personally, I know several people with finance and marketing degrees, and I am out-earning most of them working part time.</p>

<p><a href=“4.”>quote</a> Working so hard for your below-average grades, you will have very little free time.

[/quote]

Someone showing up to learn a career would say that you have a reasonable amount of free time, if you have even moderate time management skills. A millionaire playboy would say that you have very little free time. You are training for a job, get used to work. And since you are generally competing against people with a similar workload (i.e., other engineering students), you have no competitive disadvantage. It isn’t like you are competing against English majors for any jobs.</p>

<p><a href=“5.”>quote</a> So now you are out of school, and you expect all your hard work to pay off. You will get a great, exciting, fun job where you command a ton of respect and are actually interested in your work. Wrong! 90% of you will be working some mind-numbingly boring job, no more exciting than a finance majors, or other business major.

[/quote]

That suggests two things to me - first, that you don’t understand the idea of “work”, and second, that you don’t really like engineering. I should also note that all of my managers at my Fortune 100 company, up to and including the President/CEO, are engineers. And all of them spent years working as engineers before going into management. </p>

75

<p>

</p>

<p>Nursing is a profession, so this would make sense. As far as I see it, it shouldn’t be a college degree, but rather apart of trade school. It’s not an academic discipline. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s 31K/year without any health benefits, insurance, etc. and is primarily temp work these days. Funny enough, most chemical engineering graduates would laugh at an employer offering such for a chemE and they only differ from chemistry graduates by handful of credits. There is absolutely no need for the average chemistry major to major in chemistry in this day and age, seeing as you can do all of the same types of jobs and more with a chemE degree and still go to graduate school in chemistry if one desires that. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This is where I start to become incredibly skeptical. While 44k around the starting salary of a financial analyst position, to even qualify for nearly all of these positions a candidate must graduate from a top school, have a high GPA, internships experience, and also have a massive network and connections. This is NOT the average finance graduate, and I’m starting to think there’s something fishy going on with this study.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My suspicions are correct. This number is incredibly unrealistic. Math graduates, by and large, are completely unemployable and if they have not gone to graduate school or teacher’s college, they will end up in jobs that only required a high school diploma anyways. It’s extremely telling that the study does not list the industries graduates work in by major. Also, most mathematics graduates double major in something more employable (computer science, economics, etc.), as they realize doing proofs in functional analysis and algebraic topology is about as useful to employers as literature analysis is.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Again, none of these are surprising. All three are employable majors that teach skills employers value.</p>

76

<p>

</p>

<p>This list is so incredibly unrealistic that you’d be laughed off of most physics, mathematics, and chemistry forums if you posted this. These are the salaries of professors, not the average PhD graduate. This confirms my suspicion 100% that this study is rife with selection bias and only those who rise to the top of their field are actually completing this survey, as their methodology quoted from them:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The simple fact of the matter is, the average biology, physics, chemistry, and mathematics PhD are not earning anywhere near those salaries.</p>

<p>Example, 80% of PhD’s in the biological and physical sciences move onto post-doctoral work:
<a href=“Improving Graduate Education to Support a Branching Career Pipeline: Recommendations Based on a Survey of Doctoral Students in the Basic Biomedical Sciences | CBE—Life Sciences Education”>CBE--Life Sciences Education (LSE);

<p>Average post-doctoral salary in the U.S is 41K:
<a href=“Postdoctoral Research Associate Salary in 2024 | PayScale”>http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Postdoctoral_Research_Associate/Salary&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Which is actually brought up by PhD’s in lucrative fields (engineering, business, and certain pharmaceutical specializations). The average for biological and physical sciences tends towards 35K, actually. </p>

<p>Out of those 80% mentioned earlier, less than 20% are offered a permanent position in academia (i.e professorship):</p>

<p><a href=“http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/12/10/a-deeper-look-into-the-80-of-phds-who-do-not-become-professors/”>http://scienceadvocacy.org/Blog/2011/12/10/a-deeper-look-into-the-80-of-phds-who-do-not-become-professors/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Consistent with what I was saying earlier. So, unless the other 20% are earning millions to bring up the average or the other 90% who are forced to go to industry are earning well into the six figures. As this is obviously not the case, these numbers are either a blatant fabrication or a classic example of statistical bias. My suspicion is right on the money, it’s only professors or other research scientists that manage to get a permanent position in academia that are responding to this “survey” and it is most certainly not the average PhD. The fact they carefully omitted the industries that survey respondents are working in is of most interest, isn’t it? </p>

<p>This type of intellectual dishonesty has been the modus operandi of colleges and universities for the past decade or so into deceiving students into thinking their choice of major is actually employable. If a student did not take the initiative to read between the lines, dig into the treasure trove of data that is not made as widely available as it should be, and make their own educated conclusions thereafter, it’s very easy to see why so many students are in the position they are today. The fact of the matter is, the average science and mathematics PhD’s will find themselves in a position where they are forced out of academia (once post-doc funding runs out, as they are temporary) and that they need to restart from the end of high school all over again in terms of retraining and gaining skills and knowledge that employers actually value. Although I don’t have the hard data at hand, I don’t think social science and liberal arts PhD’s are doing much better (if at all).</p>

77

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with this, but how about if you only have a 10% chance of actually finding a job in your field after 8-10 years of post-secondary education and 4-7 years as an apprentice (postdoc)? If as a PhD I had the same chance of getting a permanent academic job as a bachelors level engineer does in industry, then I certainly wouldn’t mind making a stable 40-50K for the rest of my academic career, which is a decent salary actually. </p>

<p>It’s not the relatively low salaries that bother people, it’s the incredibly low job security. It’s really more comparable to the entertainment industry than any other stable career choice. A very select few will strike it big and live the dream (professors), while the vast majority (~90%) will languish. </p>

<p>If your child tells you she wants to pursue an acting career, will you tell them to “follow her dreams” and that everything will end up fine or will you tell them to be realistic and guide them to more employable careers that are more in line with their interests? </p>

78

<p>

Are you familiar with actuarial mathematics? It’s the 2nd highest paying major in the Payscale report at <a href=“http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/majors-that-pay-you-back”>http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/majors-that-pay-you-back&lt;/a&gt; (PT), in terms of mid career salary, higher than all engineering majors except for petroleum. Many mathematics majors get in to actuary work with only a bachelor’s and do quite well financially, some would say as well as engineers. Other sources list quite similar results the Georgetown study… For example, the list below compares the Georgetown study with conversion to 2014 dollars (GT) against the Payscale report I linked to earlier in the post. I am including only the fields for which I listed starting salary in my earlier post. Note that the fields you questioned, finance and mathematics, are quite similar between the two reports. The only one with a difference large enough that I consider to be questionable is chemistry, which may relates to selection bias in who chooses to post their salary on Payscale and/or different methodologies </p>

<p>Nursing - $52k (GT) vs $55k (PS)
Chemistry - $34k (GT) vs $44k (PS)
Finance - $48k (GT) vs $49k (PS)
Mathematics - 44k (GT) vs $49k (PS)
Civil Engineering - 55k (GT) vs $54k (PS)
Liberal Arts - $34k (GT) vs $37k (PS)
Mechanical Engineering -62k (GT) vs $61k (PS)
Computer Science - 54k (GT) vs $60k (PS)</p>

<p>

If you check out the median salary reported in census results in the government BLS database, you’ll find that quite a few of these graduate positions in non-engineering STEM fields do pay well. For example, the BLS reports median salaries of over $100k for both mathematicians and physicists who had a PhD. Biochemists had a median salary over $80k. Actuaries had a median salary of nearly $100k with only a bachelor’s.</p>

79

<p>^I support studying engineering, but I still also support the do what you love.^
Personally if my child wanted to pursue acting and I had belief that he or she could make it, I would actually consider letting him or her do it. I certainly would advise them on what their getting themselves into, as some children may not know what they actually want, and what it truly involves, but as the saying goes: you only live once, so you might as well use it to do what makes you happy. It personally bothers me more when a student chooses a major they have close to no interest in, either because their parents forced them to do it, they just wanted money, they’re in college and don’t even know what they want to do, or they just wanted an easy way out. Plus, you technically don’t even need a college degree to become most things in the entertainment industry: musician, actor, artist. Best option in my opinion: pick up a lucrative college degree and pursue your dream career/interests part time.</p>

80

<p>

</p>

<p>I was interested in getting into this sometime ago, but from the people I know who already graduated and wanted to get into this type of work, the field is completely saturated. Every mathematics majors that doesn’t want to be a mathematician or a math teacher wants to become an actuary, and with specialized majors that are marketed towards employers (such as actuarial science), it’s not clear that this is a viable path any longer (if it ever was).
Accounts by recent graduates further cement this, such as:
<a href=“Actuary Information.”>http://www.math.ubc.ca/~anstee/actuary2012.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

</p>

<p>The issue is not starting salaries, which are actually quite decent. The issue at hand is whether the average graduate of their given program is actually working that job and earning that much. This is extremely unclear, and going off the graduate level salaries you cite, it is most probably the case that there are no valid controls against major statistical bias in these studies and that only an insignificant fraction of graduates actually end up with jobs in their field. Hence, while entry-level actuaries have a very good starting salary, it is highly likely they are not the average beginning actuary (which is most probably unemployed). That’s the problem I and many others have with these studies. They don’t make any meaningful distinction between what the average graduate of a degree is earning and what a person working in the field is earning. The fact they almost always omit the industries graduates tend to work in these studies suggests that there is a intentional effort in leaving it out. For example, in these studies, physics PhD’s working in the field tend to average into the 6 figures. The problem is, the average physics PhD is most definitely not working in the field. In fact, less than 10% are. A student taking that data at face-value would then be led to conclude that the average physics PhD is earning 6 figures, when that is not at all consistent with reality.</p>