However, the quotes in #37 specify “professional or pre-professional fields”, which presumably includes a lot more than engineering (e.g. business, education, interior design, nutrition, etc.). So it would not be accurate to assume that liberal arts major graduates necessarily outearn engineering graduates by mid-career.
Indeed, engineering graduates mostly cluster at the top end of the mid-career median pay levels in http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Degrees_that_Pay_you_Back-sort.html , though some liberal arts majors (economics, physics, math) do about as well. But some other pre-professional majors (education, interior design, nutrition, criminal justice, hospitality/tourism) cluster near the bottom, along with some liberal arts majors (Spanish, drama, music, sociology).
I am not against a business major. As a matter of fact my daughter was recently invited to the business school at her university to get some type of “certificate” which would compliment her current major. She turned it down… twice … despite me quietly suggesting she look into it. What I am against is forcing a student into a certain major… whether it’s business or something else.
@ucbalumnus and @turtle17 - it was too late to edit “engineering” and replace it with “professional and pre-professional” when I found the actual reference - that post was made before i went to get the book and look it up.
I think it’s also clear form my post that i didn’t read the study yet, nevermind “the whole thing”.
Caveat - still haven’t read the study itself, the PDF available online that is free is a scanned one, not super reader friendly. But i have it and will.
From my observations in the working world, most* undergrad business majors are treated no differently and in the case of a few firms(such as a financial firm I used to work for in the urban NE), treated worse unless their undergrad business degree was from one of the elite undergrad b-schools(think Wharton, NYU-Stern, UVA McIntire, Berkeley HAAS, UMich-Ross, etc).
Also, being a STEM major doesn’t guarantee a high rewarding career or even steady employment. In the '70s and early '80s, my older relatives and family friends…some of whom were career engineers themselves recounted career prospects for ChemE majors were so bad that many graduates…and not only recent grads were underemployed as waiters, taxi drivers, retail clerks, etc and they did their utmost to dissuade prospective/early undergrads from pursuing ChemE. Some of the parents of the era who were clued in were said to have felt ChemE majors/grads had a far better chance landing a leading role in a major Hollywood production right off the bat than to land gainful employment as a chemical engineer.
Much more recently, plenty of engineering/CS majors were left unemployed in the wake of the dotcom bust of 2001. Several former startup/corporate colleagues and younger friends in those majors ended up un/underemployed for long periods because the state of the programmer/computer technology job market was so bad back then.
One friend with a CS masters from a respectable CS program ended up working as a bigbox retail clerk for a few years.
In 2011, found the representative who facilitated my friend’s car rental from a major car rental chain was a CS graduate who never entered the CS profession because he graduated into the dotcom bust and from his account, was underemployed for nearly a decade before landing this car rental rep gig…his first full-time job.
Just goes to show no matter what your major, you need to know how to jump into a different one if necessary, and have the critical thinking, writing, speaking, and perhaps quant skills to do so.
@txsparty - I can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t think there is anything wrong with being a business major (I married one ) BUT - I do take issue with the idea that ONLY business or STEM majors are worthwhile - and that college exists ONLY to train students in a particular career
If I had a dime for every “International Business” major I’ve interviewed in my life who couldn’t discuss for even five minutes the differences between China and India’s move away from a feudal economy and towards a (more- even slightly) market economy, I could quit my job. Kids who are graduating in that same “international business” who don’t know why NATO is important, why the shift to the Euro was a radical (and scary) thing, why changes in mining practices in South Africa and Zimbabwe have an impact on the cars we drive in the US (or the cellphones we use), etc. And I’m not talking a game of “gotcha”- my interview style is to generally do 3-4 minutes of chitchat, followed by 5 minutes of “hey did you see this article on the front page of the New York Times or Washington Post or USA Today” when it’s relevant to their field of interest.
There is nothing wrong with being a business major. But if you’re interested in marketing, your education isn’t going to end when you close the book for the day. You need to be aware of “stuff” in the world- is the Vatican’s move towards more transparent communications a good thing or bad thing for the Catholic church and what does it say about the Pope’s skills as a marketer? If you’re interested in Supply Chain Management, you need to have thought about the impact on society when Old Navy can sell a T shirt for 5 dollars, still make a profit, but the factory in Pakistan is paying 9 year olds 3 cents per unit. That’s supply chain- the good and the bad. If you are interested in Finance, you need to educate yourself about the Depression, why banks fail, what happened in 2007/2008 and the implications for the housing market as Millenials move into their prime home buying years. If you are in a program which doesn’t try to cast business issues into the larger world, then do it yourself. Read, read, read.
People are critical of business majors when they “emerge” into the world at age 22 convinced that they’ve learned what they need to succeed in “business”. They aren’t interested in pharmaceutical research (a huge business issue on multiple levels), they aren’t interested in infrastructure or asking how 50 states are going to finance major bridge and road projects simultaneously via bond issues or taxation and what that might do to the market for cement or steel, they aren’t interested in asking what the introduction of driverless cars is going to do to the urban core of our cities.
These are the things that actual business people try to learn about. And this is why some (not all- some) employers prefer to hire the much maligned history or poli sci or literature major. Because they may not know how to do a discounted cash flow analysis (which we can teach a reasonably numerate person likkety split) but they know how to learn stuff. All kinds of stuff. And when they can also write well, and are fluent in a language or two besides English AND can find Portugal or Ukraine on a map- hey, that’s a big bonus.
Anyone who goes to Williams or Amherst is fine. It is those who goes to a lower tier and struggling LAC with a major such as art history that may find it challenging in the job market.
From the study in OHmomof2’s link:
"Liberal arts graduates don’t fare quite as well when they possess just an undergraduate degree, though.
This is really important because once a liberal arts grad hits law, med or business school, the dynamic totally changes even if the eng or CS major gets a masters. Typically 25% of b-school students are l/a majors, 25% economics so 50% there, the other 50% are undergrad engr and business. And the l/a grads tend to have better soft skills - networking, communication, interpersonal that are more important in being successful, however you want to define that.
Liberal arts colleges do NOT have the market cornered on learning for learnings sake. In fact, with the extremely high % of students admitted for Athletics and other hooks, you will find many many students at LACs (just like a regular universities) that are just trying to get through college as best as they can.
This is my problem with this topic on CC. The LAC cheerleaders act like there is no critical thinking going on outside the top 15 LACs in the US. Also, there are smart critical thinkers majoring in engineering, nursing, business, CS etc. Those degrees do not make you not a thinker.
Also, to the poster who’s nephew is in a boring corporate training program - many Liberal Arts majors are likely sitting in that same training program! You don’t go from a History major (nor business major) to the Corner office or to some fascinating international travel career at graduation. If the student was forced into the major, that’s unfortunate - but it doesn’t change the fact that many entry level jobs are boring to start - LAC degree or otherwise.
Edited to make 1 more point - the British must have no critical thinkers or students who learn for learning sake since all colleges and universities there focus completely on major subject only - so no liberal degree course distribution. Not sure how they manage finding fulfilling work!
“In fact, with the extremely high % of students admitted for Athletics and other hooks, you will find many many students at LACs (just like a regular universities) that are just trying to get through college as best as they can.”
At the top tier LACs, athletes (and others) still meet a very high standard to get accepted. There are no athletic scholarships doled out and I think it would be challenging to find “dumb jocks” at least from the schools I am most aware of. Seems like stereotypes abound everywhere.
I didn’t say dumb jocks. I said students that are extremely focused on learning for learning sake (highly intellectual types). I can tell you that I personally know 3-4 kids from my kids high school (just graduated ) attending top 10 LACs that are not the intellectual types. Their hook was sports and the are B+ students from full pay families. They are extremely focused on sports, getting decent grades and partying!
Actually, the British and many current foreign educational systems do cover the liberal arts at earlier stages of their educational career whether it’s the A-levels or earlier in the UK, the Gymnasium/Realgymnasium* and earlier in Germany/central and European countries, etc.
Also, keep in mind that undergrad in the UK and many other countries is closer to that of a US Masters degree in practice partially because the gen/eds were expected/assumed to have been covered at earlier stages of one’s education.
This is one key reason why even back in WWII, US intelligence reports stated a German/European Gymnasium graduate who attained the Abitur diploma has the education equivalent to an American with an respectable/elite college prep HS diploma AND the first 2 years of US undergrad at a respectable/elite college/university.
I think @toowonderful in post #46 has it right with his/her two points:
There are many great majors in the world, and many great career options in the world, and different students will be a good "match" for different experiences. I do not think one type of experience is best for everyone, so there is no "versus" or competition here. It is great that so many choices exist!
And the college experience can be about so much more than matching a student to a career. Regardless of one's intended college or major, enjoy the learning process for its own sake! Use these magical four years to enjoy conversations with others who love learning as much as you do. It is a very special time indeed.
A-levels, gymnasium, etc… is high school. It shows how weak our high school education is that we have so much focus on general liberal studies in college here.
@suzyQ7 I wouldn’t equate grades with intellectuality and learning for learning sake either. The two have very little to do with each other. I know plenty of curious, intellectual students who get B+ grades and plenty of athletes who are plenty curious and interested in academics. Given the small class nature of LACs, in general, at least at the better schools, no kid is attending to just skate by.
@suzyQ7 Actually, a major reason that many European countries seem to have have more advanced high school programs is because they weed students out an an earlier age. Less than a third of German students are permitted to go on to Gymnasium - the rest were shunted to vocational type schools at around the age of 12. If we did the same, we would get the same sort of results.
The USA takes the approach of trying to give everyone opportunity to be fully educated and offers many more chances to find yourself or change career paths, especially for late bloomers. I like our system better, to be quite honest.
Language majors, especially students who are really fluent in Russian, Arabic and Chinese, are in massive demand. At Barnard, recruiters for Accenture, Goldman Sachs and Google snapped up Russian and Chinese majors, offering significant signing bonuses too.
) BUT - I do take issue with the idea that ONLY business or STEM majors are worthwhile - and that college exists ONLY to train students in a particular career