There is so much in our politics, culture, and everyday living that is based on historical context. I can’t begin to imagine, nor would I want to, a time when the powers that be decide no one needs to learn anything about history. The Holocaust, slavery, Imperialism, the Vietnam war, the Arab Spring, and on and on. We are doomed to repeat mistakes of the past without it, and there is no question that so much culture that would be vastly different if we hadn’t learned from history and incorporated that into our everyday understanding of life.
That applies to work too. Sex, racial, and religious discrimination are only a few aspects to which history applies. People need to understand history to form policy, and so much more.
It’s absurd to say that a history major just reads and writes and has no other useful skills.
And hence the purpose of the posted article, which actually takes a hard look at why these fields are shrinking in popularity, suggests the need for self-criticism, AND ends with these thoughts about how the fields must embrace change. It is a very thoughtful look at the questions of interest to people who care about the humanities. But readers actually have to care about the humanities in the first place to practice his suggestions. His ideas are likely to make little sense to people start from a place of dismissal.
Accept the necessity of change. Heraclitus had it right: all is flux. Nothing stays still. The pressures for change are relentless. As Emerson supposedly quipped in response to Margaret Fuller’s declaration “I accept the universe,” she’d better.
Consider change an opportunity, not a threat. We must conquer our fear of change and reframe our thinking. I know, this cliché sounds a bit like Monty Python in Life of Brian: “Always look on the bright side of life.” But change, however unwanted, does offer an opportunity to rethink tradition and adjust to new realities.
Act intentionally. Embrace the change process. Acknowledge the challenges and consider options. Be an activator of change not change’s passive victim.
Strive for balance. When faced with difficult decisions or options, it often makes sense to strike a balance between competing interests and priorities. That doesn’t necessarily mean achieving a compromise or finding a middle ground. But it does require acknowledging the costs of change and acting accordingly.
The history of the humanities is a history of change. The humanities have shifted, over time, from a process into a body of knowledge and then into a series of technique and methodologies that emphasize interpretation. The humanities are poised to change yet again. My recommendation is that we draw upon the past as we chart our path into an uncertain future.
In other words, do what businesses do all the time as they adjust to market conditions. The thoughts above are a lot of analysis of what should have been obvious to humanities academics sometime in the last 40 years.
Yes, the missing link in the chain of logic is that it doesn’t matter WHAT you major in, you STILL need to actively figure out what you are good at, how you can add value, and then have the work ethic and track record doing something hard to back that up. Kid had awards for academic excellence, leadership roles in prominent community organizations, meaningful research for a “famous” professor (AND then editing a manuscript, further evidence of “readin’ and ritin” skills) etc.
I don’t think anyone can afford to phone it in while in college any more. I’m not giving false hope, I’m pointing out that the much disparaged humanities have active on-ramps to interesting jobs. Somehow every time I describe how Psych majors can get hired to work in advertising, marketing, etc. someone claims I’m an elitist (it works if you studied Psych at Harvard but not at Muhlenberg) or that NO PSYCH MAJOR in the world would sell out and work in advertising.
You don’t like my advice? Ignore me. But I am describing real life on-ramps and career paths with solid prospects and solid salaries. Your kids are happy with their CS majors and want to work at a hedge fund? Terrific.
History is VERY relevant to an employer. Two jobs ago I worked for a huge corporation which was opening its first ever presence in China. We needed to staff up two operations- one in Shanghai and one in Beijing. China was perceived as “sexy” at the time. But you cannot believe how ignorant many, many candidates were (internal folks as well as external candidates) about Asia in general and China in particular. The company could not risk sending a bunch of provincial no-nothings to a high risk/high reward operation.
Biggest learning- history matters. If you think you can parachute into a new country and “figure it out” on the ground- I have a bridge to sell you.
I got my BA in history (with a double major in French). I had little trouble getting well paid jobs in the financial services industry (at “name” firms) - it was pretty easy to pick up the “technical” skills. I’ve run my own consulting business (in an entirely different industry) for the past 10 years so I think I’ve done pretty well with my “useless” majors.
I understand psych is relevant for advertising. My only concern is how many new adverting jobs are there every year, and how many psych grads come out every year.
The number of people that need to understand the complexity of all this in a new operation that you are setting up in China is probably less than 10 in a setup with 100-1000 people in it. And any number of people who may or may not have other domain expertise for the company would also know something about China before going in. Or would read up before going in. Or hire an outside consultant to prep them with a briefing book on the local politics etc before going in.
I am only saying that you don’t have to major in history to have that job. There are a very small number of history majors that would be considered for that job. Indeed if you don’t have the domain expertise (say you sell aluminium into China – I know a relative who did this by the way – he had a PhD in non-ferrous metallurgy. He knew knothing about china until he went into the region. 30 years later he is an expert on the country), you won’t be considered for that job. Let’s not oversell some function/major – I am just concerned about incorrect messaging to kids considering all these majors.
You don’t have to major in business to get a job in consulting. You don’t have to major in finance to get a job at a bank. You don’t have to major in English to get a job as a teacher. You don’t have to major in art history to get a job as a museum curator.
People also get jobs based on what they learn from other jobs. Your metallurgist friend who is an expert on China has had a lot of experience. Btw, I have a good friend who studied metallurgy. He runs a restaurant.
No, you do not necessarily have to major in a specific relevant subject. But looking at recent acceptance rates of university job-seekers (Google-less than 1%, McKinsey, 1%, Goldman Sachs 3% , Citibank 5%), it would behoove students to pay attention to which majors those firms actually hired if that is their goal for employment. I am certain Google hired a classics major this year. I am also certain it hired 500x more computer scientists than classics majors.
Presumably they don’t need to be history majors to have better understanding of China. The lack of general knowledge (not specific to history) seems to be the problem for many American college graduates.
Feel free to provide more evidence to support your assertion. Edit: Your data relates to investment banking. There are a few other jobs in the world, I think.
I work with young people every day. High schoolers to college graduates. The college grads I work with apply to post grad programs (masters, PhD, law school, PA’s, etc…) Meanwhile, they have worked since graduating college. I can tell you unequivocally that not every student I work with is has worked at jobs directly related to their major.
My own D (class of ‘20 grad) earned a degree in a popular humanities subject. She then worked in a lab at a well known institution. She’s now doing a masters degree and has an internship at a publishing company during her break. People gain new skills and change course all the time, right now in 2023, even young people.
I’ll stop now, don’t want to be flagged for debate.
Edit: @ucbalumnus my D did in fact do stats and quantitative stuff as part of her humanities degree. I agree that it’s very useful for most students to do some kind of stats course. I’m not sure how that would work, but it would be prudent for humanities departments to incorporate some quantitative learning into their degrees.
So is it your belief that becoming a %^&* computer scientist (because you aren’t good at, or hate it, or barely passed your courses in college) is a better career strategy to get that Google job?
I am not suggesting that kids with a genuine interest in (fill in the blank) abandon it to learn about China’s progression to a market economy. But I am suggesting that society is better off with MORE top notch history majors than millions more crappy anything.
I am the “go-to person” for a reasonably wide circle of friends and friends of friends whose kids haven’t launched. Occasionally it’s mental illness (and I’m not a therapist and don’t pretend to be). More often it’s the nursing major who didn’t pass the boards, the CS major who can’t get a job except working an IT help desk (" I didn’t major in CS to help some middle manager fix his excel alignment problem"), the finance major who says “There are no interesting jobs in finance these days”. Which is totally true if you hate finance. Or even just dislike finance.
Parental pressure to major in something with an obvious on-ramp? I get it. But what happens when your kid phoned it in for four years and THEN can’t get on that ramp? There are lots and lots and lots of new grads who are just not good at what they studied and would be marginal employees in that field once they get hired.
What do we tell them? “Hey kid, only 40 years until you can retire”?
What would make you think that student would be a great history major? Was there some evidence to support that or maybe the kid isn’t all that excited by either subject? As I said above, the Google numbers are relevant for those seeking employment with them-not everyone is. Obviously one can always attend grad school like @Lindagaf’s kid to acquire new skills ( often at great expenseand time), but this discussion is about jobs for those with an undergrad only degree.
You might point out to your advisees that most jobs ( even those for history majors) have boring elements and most people are not fascinated to go to work everyday, particularly entry level jobs. If you are that is great but it is not typical.
I have no clue what the kid COULD have been great at. All I know is the kid is a marginally talented, disinterested CS major.
Nobody on CC is honest enough to admit if/when they shove their kid into a major which the kid isn’t suited for, they are kicking the can down the road.
But courage- the Apple Store near me is ALWAYS hiring!
These days it is hard to shove a kid into a CS major, given how hard it is to get into one :-). No one is saying that kids should do CS.
I am saying that kids should not go into an undergrad with a large budget in money and time, and no thought on what post-grad employment might be with the degree that they are just about to earn. And then hoping that the Feds will waive the loan :-). I have recently seen some gainfully employed young people at work unwilling to pay off the college loan in the hope that loan waiver is around the corner :-). We are actively subverting their morality as adults allowing this. It is a travesty.
CS is a pretty demanding major, so likely the kid has some talent. Regardless, your prior perspective should still apply-it doesnt matter what the kid majored in, he can get a job doing anything, right? In a bank, in advertising, in consulting, facilities management, whatever.
I agree with the first half of your post (but it is NOT that hard to get into a third tier private college’s CS program if you are full pay… and only marginally more difficult to get into a second tier private college’s CS program… we aren’t talking Cal Tech here). NOBODY should be ignoring post-grad whether it’s being financed by the bank of mom and dad or by the taxpayers.
I don’t personally know a lot of people who are not hard at work repaying their loans. Nieces, nephews, young cousins- some are still living like grad students into their mid 30’s with multiple roommates and lots of “come to our apartment for chili” type entertainment. But they are on the verge of paying off loans (some for grad AND undergrad) which makes the frugal lifestyle- and their careers- worth it.
