Liberal arts colleges and majors can lead to good futures

Parents Forum
1

A thread on small liberal arts colleges vs. universities, which expanded into a tangentially related discussion of liberal arts majors vs. business/ engineering/ other majors directly related to a career choice, was recently closed. I thought the discussion was still interesting, so I am starting this thread to allow the discussion to continue.

Some people expressed concerns that EITHER attending a small school like Williams or Vassar (with any major available from physics to art history), OR majoring in a pure science, social science or humanities field at any sized University or college, might lead to debt and poverty.

Everyone I know personally who pursued either route has an upper middle class or upper class salary and is very happy with the way their life turned out in terms of career satisfaction, finances, etc. They are college professors, medical doctors (pediatrician, ophthalmologic surgeon), lawyers, judges, veterinarians, scientific researchers, political scientists, psychologists, social workers, public school teachers, computer scientists, journalists, insurance executives, bankers, consultants, graphic artist for a book publishing company, research librarian for a major bank, etc. Most went on to get graduate degrees after their BA; some did not.

The other thing all these people have in common is that they enjoy thinking and learning for their own sake, not just as a means to an end. They are interested in the world of ideas.

Some chose careers that make a great deal of money and also provide job satisfaction, while others made deliberate choices to earn less but do what they love.

I suppose there could be anecdotal evidence of people with unhappy outcomes as well, so the point is not that one set of college choices will lead to financial success and one to lack thereof, just that there are many possible “correct” choices for each individual, not just one. Ultimately, all choices are individual, and any one person’s happiness will depend on his/her own choices and way of viewing his/her life.

The world is interesting because not everyone is the same. Someone who wants to attend a specialized school or major in a “pre”-something field should certainly do so. (If they want, they can also take some courses on Plato or Shakespeare along the way!) But no one should fear a liberal arts college or a major in something less directly career-related, if that is what attracts him/her (student) or his/her child (parent).

2

Most people who get a BA/BS do not get graduate degrees. If most people got a graduate degree, then you have a biased sample. Perhaps, that’s because you went to Williams.

3

@TheGreyKing - I really liked your comments on the other thread about the value of a liberal arts education and they provided some reassurance, as I am having a lot of anxiety about my daughter heading off for her first year at a selective LAC about 15 hours from home. She will likely study English and probably political science. While D was given generous financial aid, her dad is not contributing anything, so it will be a stretch for she and I to cover costs. D will have to take loans as well (just federal) and she and I are very nervous about that. As the departure date grows closer, I can see more doubt creeping into her comments. I feel that it will be a great fit for her and that it will be an incredible experience academically. However, I do have many worries about what the future holds and hope she will be able to support herself and have a fulfilling career.

4

I was a history major at an LAC, and I loved every minute of it. I have had a productive career. None of my college friends seem to be in their parent’s basements… at least based on their FB profiles. I think the purpose of college getting an education, rather than job training. That sometimes makes me feel in the minority, both here on CC and in the real world too. But that’s ok. My D is currently in a highly ranked school majoring in something she feels passionate about - which is consistently listed among the “least lucrative careers” (theater) - I’m fine with it, and not worried about her future (beyond normal mom worries). I don’t think there are any guarantees for happiness, stability, prosperity etc - and there certainly aren’t college choices that create a 100% certainty for success or failure.

5

My personal opinion is that students who are articulate, good communicators, organized, and hard working can get a job regardless of major unless the economy is really in the ditch (as it is from time to time, of course). My poli sci/public policy major kid has a very good job with a consulting company. It isn’t exactly what she studied for, but she actually likes the work very well (and is sorta glad she isn’t working in politics at the moment!). Other kid is a physics major - - not exactly a degree that has tons of entry level jobs directly related to her studies. But she focused on research related to material science, and is in a paid grad school program this fall where that is a particular strength of the program. Bottom line is that she is self supporting (if she has her act together enough to pay her bills - ahem), and should be pretty employable when she finishes that degree.

6

My kids (poli sci majors) have been self-supporting since graduating from their respective B.A. programs,-- and there has been no significant difference in career trajectory even though my d’s degree is from a top-drawer, elite LAC, and son’s is from an in-state regional. Both started with jobs with roughly equivalent pay & benefits within 2 weeks of graduating. Both kids also now have grad degrees, but both worked for several years before starting grad school. Son took off from work to attend grad school for 2 years; DD worked continuously while attending grad school part time for 3 years. Although their degrees are the same, their jobs are very different - son is employed by a large state agency; daughter works as a business manager for a small media firm. (Son’s job bears a relationship to his degrees, whereas daughter’s doesn’t).

I never worried – the most important factor for employment is previous employment history, so the best career preparation is simply the various part time and summer jobs student take over the years, whether or not directly related to their choice of school or major.

7

I think the one problem that can arise with a Liberal Arts degree is that although you are well prepared for many jobs you may not know what direction you want to go in. Compared to getting an accounting or engineering degree, where your career path (at least initial path out of college) is pretty clear. You need excellent guidance and career services to help these liberal arts majors see the opportunities open to them and help them set out on a path. I know of several recent LAC grads who are floundering - not for lack of intelligence or talent but for lack of direction.

8

I am firmly in the camp that believes in a liberal arts education. Our S19 is a thinker and wants to be around kids who want to learn for learning’s sake. On a recent trip to a local Colleges That Change Lives LAC, he was like a kid in a candy store when one of the physics professors took him and two other prospective students on a tour. She told the kids to call her by her first name and then spent over an hour showing them around. He loved it. He very easily could have visited with a history or English professor and loved it just as much. He wants to know his professors and has yet to narrow down his interests.

My biggest concern revolves around the career center at schools like this. Top tier LACs have better alumni systems and more companies that recruit undergrads for summer and post-undergrad jobs. I’m not worried to send him to somewhere like Carelton, Middlebury, etc., but I am a little worried about his safety LACs being able to point him in the right direction. Also, and I hope this isn’t too controversial, some of his safety LACs have a decent amount of Pell Grant recipients. While I think that’s wonderful in many ways, it doesn’t bode well for S19 to meet kids who may have connections. Both my husband and I benefitted from our fellow students’ connections from Northwestern. I don’t see our S19 going to grad school (maybe not at all but definitely not right after undergrad). While he’s a curious kid and very bright, he wants to be out in the world working after college.

9

Attitude counts for a lot.

I was a Classics major and my first job out of college was in a management training program in an industry where I had zero interest, in a city where I didn’t want to live. But I got a job offer during senior year of college, it was during a terrible recession so my expectations on salary, employability, etc. were quite modest, and I took it.

“lack of direction” is often a blessing in disguise. I counsel a lot of young people who have “failed to launch” and it’s rarely about their GPA, major, or actual employability. It’s almost always attitude. A kid who majored in Broadcast journalism but won’t pursue a job at the PBS station in St. Louis. A kid who majored in history who has a professor who told him about a great job working in the archive of a historical society in Tulsa. A kid who will ONLY move to SF, Austin, Portland or Seattle.

A kid who understands that an entry level position is exactly that- entry level, and that it might not have the combination of cool, instagram-worthy title, and enormous salary is going to be fine. But if you want a job in the exact industry, city, salary, and exciting travel opportunities that TV portrays of young 20 somethings, you are going to be frustrated.

10

I was prepared to explain that sciences were a part of the liberal arts but, Bravo!, you did include them.

I got my BA with Honors in Chemistry at a flagship U. The choice of BA/BS was mine as I had met requirements for both- I liked the white tassel better than the yellow. My large top tier research U included so many opportunities for diverse courses I’m sure no two students ever have had the same list. I believe about 80% of undergrads are in the College of Letters and Sciences- ie most students. Breadth requirements are there for an education, not just job training. A huge nation (and world) wide alumni network for those who care.

I am glad people pointed out your limited sampling for success. It is anecdotal. In your world you do not run across the less successful.

Since the majority of grads are likely to have liberal arts degrees (see above 80%) I do not see your point as being noteworthy. You do point out that those from small LACs can succeed as well as the others. The mindset of those in the Northeast who post on CC seems so geared towards the myriads of small LACs. I’m sure the public U grads there just as often do just as well. Like most of those elsewhere they see no need for CC.

Post # 8- attitude… Amen.

11

If the implication is that, for job and career prospects, whom you know matters more than what college you attend, what you study in college, or how well you do, then that implies that, for the majority who go to work after earning a BA/BS, college is more of a finishing school, networking opportunity, or some such than any other purpose it may have.

12

@ucbalumnus I didn’t mean to imply that I want our kids to go to college solely to make connections. I don’t think that’s what I said. I just know that it’s not a bad thing to go to school with kids who may be able to help with job prospects. i don’t think there’s a downside to that.

And I know two Wisconsin grads who came upon their first jobs through a friend’s parent so I know it’s not just small schools that can provide connections. The combination, though, of small school, less-connected students, and a small alumni base may not be the best for job opportunities out of undergrad. I guess it’s just something I will have to ask each school when we visit their career centers. I don’t think most LACs have a multitude of companies coming to campus to interview so I wonder how the kids to about finding jobs.

13

My D and S graduated with liberal arts degrees from a top LAC and a Top Univ. It would never have occurred to either of them to seek jobs through classmates or classmates’ families. Both are employed and enjoying their work. I would not choose or avoid a school based on the income backgrounds of fellow students.

14

There are so many misconceptions on CC around this topic that we often think we disagree about things then realize we aren’t using terms that mean the same thing to us all.

  1. **Only LACs offer liberal arts.** Harvard, UCLA and every university out there does too.
  2. **Liberal arts does not include STEM.** With the caveat that the "E, engineering, is available at only a handful of LACs, S (science), T (tech, usually in the form of computer science) and M (math) are most definitely available at just about every LAC and university in the country.
  3. **Majoring in any of the "Arts and Humanities" (though sometimes this extends to pure math and science majors too) leads only to life in your parents' basement and a job brewing coffee.** A&H are actually what many people seem to think are synonymous with "liberal arts". Stanford's list is "philosophy, literature, religion, art, music, history and language ". I'd add the social sciences to that list. Every university and LAC offers these, and people who graduate with these degrees can and do go on to very successful adult careers.

One can get a broad liberal arts education anywhere, the distinction between LACs and Us has to do with size and the presence of grad programs, and those do affect the experience in many ways.

One can also major in a more immediately “practical” field at either one. CS and applied math come to mind.

The basic purpose of college in this country, IMO, was to provide an understanding of everything that has gone before us in world civilizations, to teach what has already been learned by others so that this human knowledge can be built upon. We see better when we stand on the shoulders of giants, there is no need to reinvent the wheel etc etc.

So colleges broadly aim to teach students what has been done in math, the sciences, the social sciences, history, adding exposure to art and languages, etc. An additional goal was for students to have a solid understanding of our history so they could participate fully in our democracy as informed citizens, whether they participated directly (going into politics) or just passively (voting).

I think these goals are still relevant.

This is worth a read for those interested in the discussion about “liberal arts” education vs “vocational” education: http://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Day-the-Purpose-of-College/151359

It maintains that the shift from the original purpose of a college education to a more “what job will I get with this right out of college” focus happened around the late 1960s.

15

The T (technology) can also mean engineering technology majors, which are somewhat less common than engineering majors.
http://www.abet.org/accreditation/new-to-accreditation/engineering-vs-engineering-technology/
http://www.rit.edu/emcs/admissions/academics/majors/engineering-tech-or-engineering

The S (science) and M (math) in STEM are among the liberal arts.

One other misconception is that all STEM majors have good major-specific job and career prospects. But the most popular STEM major is biology, and the heavy supply of biology graduates (who did not get into health professional schools and such) relative to the biology-specific jobs means that the biology-specific job prospects are not that great, so biology graduates should consider also looking into major-agnostic jobs as well.

Since most citizens do not complete bachelor’s degrees, such goals need to be addressed in high school. Indeed, high schools often attempt to do so with mandatory US history, civics, and sometimes state history courses, but the quality of such is uneven, and the content and teaching are often biased by the political leanings of the day in the state boards of education (e.g. what was the major political dispute and reason that led to the civil war?).

16

@OHMomof2 – fascinating Chronicle article. Thanks for sharing the link.

17

@homerdog - “connections” are not always through wealthy families – and a lot of students from more modest backgrounds of good real-world work experience, which also leads to jobs. Knowing a peer who works at a particular company is often much more important than knowing a kid with a parent who has an important position. My son formed more “connections” via his public regional U than my daughter got via an elite private LAC, though not via anyone’s parent. It’s just a matter of thinking a little more broadly.

Same is true with career centers and on-campus recruiting. The recruiting is NOT the way most students find jobs, and the best thing a career center can do is provide resources that help students understand how to actively seek employment beyond the companies that visit the campus. My d used on-campus recruitng as a way to practice interviewing skills, not as a way to look for work – she did benefit from a great career office, but they didn’t find a job for her. Rather they provided mentoring and help with developing a resume, cover letter - and learning networking skills, such as the value of arranging informational interviews.

18

@homedog - Lots of employers supply career centers with nothing more than an e-mail address for forwarding resumes. Also, I’m not sure if they still do it, but, once a year, Wesleyan, Bowdoin and Amherst used to bus kids to New York City for joint interviews with Wall Street firms.

19

@circuitrider they do a lot more than that these days. https://www.amherst.edu/campuslife/careers/amherst-careers-in/business-finance-entrepreneurship/get-involved

Career centers can offer a lot of “carrots” if they choose, to help kids begin their careers:

Internships available only to those students who complete a set of workshops/resume edits/etc.

Funding for otherwise unpaid internships.

Alumni mentoring programs, not just a directory.

Regular workshops, lunches, events with free food :smiley:

20

Regarding the percentage of frosh who considered “being very well off financially” and “developing a meaningful philosophy of life” over the years (the bar graphs in the linked page), anyone notice that the major shifts occurred during the economic stagnation of the 1970s? Indeed, the article makes the following statement about the 1970s:

However, the article also says:

But wasn’t it true that liberal arts education historically had been a luxury good for the scions of the upper classes, with a brief period in the 1950s-1970s in the US when it was more widely available to everyone else through the growth of inexpensive subsidized state universities and the GI Bill, but with much less of the economic pressures on both the students and the universities compared to today?