Is "entrepreneurship/business" the new "art history" major?

<p>No Erin’s dad----it’s related to hydraulic engineering and manufacturing.</p>

<p>^ Interesting. I thought with the degree and the screen name it would be at least an arts organization. Congrats on doing so well.</p>

<p>It is neither sarcastic nor “insensitive.” (Funny how you apparently don’t think it is “insensitive” to diss art history majors…) It is my straightforward opinion. I think that art history is an excellent, worthwhile major that will enrich the rest of one’s life. </p>

<p>Interestingly, my only college friend who became an accountant majored in art history as an undergrad. She then went to Northeastern and obtained a master’s degree in accounting, taking advantage of their excellent coop program, and started a successful career with, IIRC, Cooper Lybrand, eventually working for the SEC in DC and working towards a law degree at the same time. Unfortunately, her career was cut short by a debilitating accident, so I don’t know where she might have ended up. </p>

<p>I would add that my H, who is an MBA/CFA, thinks that undergraduate business degrees are a waste of four years. He regards history as the ideal major, although he majored in Econ. To each his own.</p>

<p>"The difference is that if you major in Art History you have actually learned a lot about something that will enrich the rest of your life. "</p>

<p>Some people like more “academic” / ivory tower learning like art history (I’m one of them!). And some people really groove on accounting, or becoming a plumber, or an aesthetician, or a fashion designer, or any of the thousands of different areas that life has to offer. Why the snark? Or did you really mean “to each his own”? I think it’s great that there are people who want to plunge right into something that’s pre-professional and people who want to ruminate on the great arts and letters. It would be a boring world if we were all the same.</p>

<p>One of the aspects of my art history classes that I especially loved was the emphasis on studying a work of art in the context of the history, literature, and religion of its period as well as the way geometry and chemistry factor in analysis and restoration. In the thirty years since receiving my BA, I’ve worked as an archivist, corporate trainer, personnel manager, editor, and teacher. My art history background has made me better at all of those jobs and continues to enrich my life immeasurably. My business major sister has worked as a gallery manager and antiques dealer and led her city’s efforts to build a children’s museum. Given how quickly the economy is changing, being adaptable and having skills that apply in a range of careers are going to be qualities that our kids will need to develop, be they STEM or Theatre majors.</p>

<p>While RE did take a hit for a few years demand for good investment RE majors is good and so is the pay. From UW-Msn BBS 37 RE majors got hired at an avg salary over $55k plus bonus last year. . Even in the teeth of the recession (2010) 45 majors got hired at an avg pay of $50k plus bonus.</p>

<p>As an English/Chemistry double major, I have never dissed art history majors - perhaps you confused me with someone else. </p>

<p>My aggravation comes from what PG alluded too - that some people assume that accountants are soulless drones who chose their degree only for the earning potential. Believe it or not, my D LOVES accounting - the work, the people, the arcane details of her studies, the nuts and bolts of the job (she doesn’t even complain about the 80-to-90 hour workweeks… at least not much…) She actually enjoyed studying for her CPA exams. </p>

<p>I just don’t get why her love of her field is somehow inferior to the love an art history major (…or an English major…) feels for his/her chosen area.</p>

<p>I never understood entrepreneurship as a major. Seems to make more sense to take that money and go start a business. IMO, it’s completely different than getting a BBA. </p>

<p>Do folks look down on undergrad business in the US? I find this very strange because where I am, undergrad business programs are among the most selective in our universities.
Among my siblings and children there are three business undergrads and two MBAs, representing three of the top five business schools in the country. One graduated in 06, in a class of 200. According to the school, four years previous there were 3000 applicants. </p>

<p>Undergraduate general business programs are notorious for low standards and weak, undemanding curricula. Exceptions are accounting, finance, and economics, which are acknowledged as rigorous.</p>

<p>For the millions who have a cargo-cult attitude toward the bachelor’s degree, “business” means that you will get a job after graduation, which is why all these millions go to college in the first place. They are not going to learn; they are going to get credentialed to enter the workforce. If they could get a white-collar job without college, they wouldn’t bother. Those are the kinds of students who flock to generic business majors in great numbers. I teach English at a large comprehensive university in the Northeast. Some of my very weakest students in general education literature requirement courses are business majors (NOT accounting or finance majors, who tend to be sharp).</p>

<p>I guess I disagree with the thread title because no one ever majored in Art History in the mistaken belief that it would garner a lucrative job. That’s why “Entrepreneurship/Business” can never be the new “Art History.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Business majors are subject to external accreditation by the AACSB (which also accredits accounting), although the standards do not seem to require an especially high level of rigor. There is also ACBSP accreditation for business majors where the standards seem to be even lower, based on the schools that have gained that accreditation (e.g. some well known for-profit universities of questionable academic reputation).</p>

<p>Perhaps what may be more relevant is that the undergraduate business major increases in popularity as one goes down the admission selectivity scale in colleges, while the reverse is true for most liberal arts majors. Most other pre-professional majors are fairly similar to business in this respect, except for engineering, which is more like liberal arts in this respect (probably because the relatively high minimum level of rigor screens out the weaker students). So it is not surprising that, given a “random” (with respect to school graduated from) selection of business majors and liberal arts majors, one may have found the business majors to be less impressive unless one applies a secondary screen like GPA or selectivity of school graduated from, as mentioned by another poster above.</p>

<p>DrewBreesus, please start a new thread to discuss yourself. This is a more general thread, see the title. It will serve you better than to do a hijack.</p>

<p>I have found that among the colleges my S applied to, the business program was the most selective second only to the engineering program. I’m not sure why there is an attitude that business is easy. Maybe it depends on the school. My opinion is that the programs he has considered provide a very well-rounded education that produces a thinking adult. He still needs to take the normal core curriculum just like any liberal arts student, plus all the business courses. </p>

<p>There does appear to be a significant difference in perception of business majors where either the entire school is highly selective, or the business major is highly selective within the school, versus where neither the school nor the business major is that selective.</p>

<p>scout59, perhaps the premise of the thread escaped your notice. As did the premise of COUNTLESS other threads declaring that art history or any other humanities major is useless, worthless, and “easy.” When we stop seeing that garbage, I will have energy to get worked up over the sensibilities of accounting majors, who generally receive nothing but approbation here. </p>

<p>The entire school is highly selective:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.queensu.ca/admission/apply/firstyear/averages.html”>http://www.queensu.ca/admission/apply/firstyear/averages.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>The business major is highly selective within the school (look at the bottom of the page):</p>

<p><a href=“http://futurestudents.yorku.ca/requirements/ontario”>http://futurestudents.yorku.ca/requirements/ontario&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>The “shoe lickers” always tell you they went to Schulich, never York.:)</p>

<p>Neither the school nor the business major is that selective:</p>

<p><a href=“http://laurentian.ca/program-specific-requirements”>http://laurentian.ca/program-specific-requirements&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>In no case can I fine higher admissions requirement in arts and science than I do in business/commerce. Because of the high level of transparency in admission, I can easily estimate a student’s quality by knowing his major and then his school. In fact, simply knowing the fact that two senior maths are required tells me these students are better than average for the school; A professor once called the senior calculus course here in Ontario the invisible sieve. </p>

<p>Just curious @Canuckguy, but by “highly selective” are you referring to the students average GPA? Since admissions in music, visual art, theater et al are dependent primarily on portfolios and auditions (in fact for music it’s practically ONLY the audition that matters) the GPA is skewed towards the low side. In fact the MOST competitive school in the US is Curtis, the music school. Only admitting 4-5 percent of its applicants. The art students “quality”, as you put it, is more often than not reflected in their portfolio and audtion, NOT their GPA.</p>

<p>Here is an article from the NYT that discusses the undergraduate business major in the US:</p>

<p><a href=“The Default Major: Skating Through B-School - The New York Times”>The Default Major: Skating Through B-School - The New York Times;

<p>Even though it’s from 2011, I don’t think things have changed all that much.</p>

<p>And yes, like everything else a student could study, where you go makes a difference in your experience.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>But it likely makes a much bigger difference in some fields like business than it does for some other fields like engineering.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It is actually GPA and something else if you are talking about subjects like fine art, music, business etc. In my opinion, there should be special institutions for those who want to be professional singers, athletes, ballet dancers and what have you (where they can be “hot housed” and have their academic work supplement their main interest). I think a university should be an academic institution first and foremost.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I suspect there is a bit of “cherry-picking” going on. While business students do not do well on the CLA after two years, the results are very different after four years:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2011/06/16/connor_essay_on_why_majors_matter_in_how_much_college_students_learn”>http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2011/06/16/connor_essay_on_why_majors_matter_in_how_much_college_students_learn&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>When I showed this to a family member, she immediately pointed to case based business courses she took in her third and fourth year. Learning to think on your feet and solving real life problems on a regular basis can do wonders. What I take away from the CLA is that your major matters; It also shows me that our traditional beliefs sometimes do not stand up to empirical analysis very well.</p>