<p>Actually, each year’s survey is closed and replaced by the next year’s survey. So each year’s survey covers initial post-graduation activities up to about six months after graduation, so there is no inflation of earlier year statistics due to longer time.</p>
<p>The example student in the first post probably would have gotten a job in the 2006 bubble despite the presumed laziness (though a bubble job has a significant chance of disappearing in the bust). However, the presumed laziness would have pretty much guaranteed not finding a job in 2009 (though even non-lazy graduates would have had a hard time then).</p>
<p>The conclusion should not be “don’t go into engineering” or “don’t go into civil engineering”. It should be “don’t be lazy” (something you can control) and “economic and industry cycles happen” (something that is mostly luck of the draw with respect to when you graduate, though if you have the option to go to graduate school or extend undergraduate by a year to get past the worst of the economic downturn, that may be worth considering).</p>
<p>Oh, my bad ucbalumnus, thanks for clearing that up. But I totally agree with what you have to say: don’t be lazy, and try to make the best of the economic situation.</p>
<p>The survey really needs to be taken with a grain of salt. </p>
<p>For one, unemployed graduates are likely to have more time to fill out a survey and are more likely to have remained at their old address. Therefore, the survey is likely skewed to be more representative of the unemployed graduates.</p>
<p>Number two, although the survey may remain open for up to six months, that does not say anything about when the survey was filled out by any of the students. For example, one student may fill out the survey two months after graduation and then find a job in the third month. It is unlikely he/she would take the time to go update their survey response, although I suppose that is possible. </p>
<p>Finally, the survey’s are voluntary response surveys which make them statistically invalid for drawing factual conclusions.</p>
<p>I think the best we can get from the surveys is a general idea of how graduates of one class are faring compared to another class, and how one major is stacking up against a different major. But even then, the survey results are unlikely to accurately reflect reality because of the flaws I mentioned.</p>
If you’re a civil engineering major, are your job prospects largely beyond your control? The 2006 lazy guy would get a job and get laid off during the bust, but he would at least get some money and work experience. The 2009 hardworking guy, however, would have neither of those two things.</p>
<p>Looking forward, how bad is the situation for 2011 civil engineering grads? The stock market is up, GDP is growing again, and unemployment is slowly coming down, but the construction industry is terrible and is continuing to get worse every day :(</p>
<p>Job prospects (for graduates of any major) are always dependent both on things you control (lazy / non-lazy, doing well in school or previous jobs, etc.) and things you have little control over (e.g. economic and industry cycles, though some people find it possible to delay entry into a poor job market by going to graduate school or something like that, hoping that the economy or industry recovers somewhat).</p>
<p>Civil engineering was particularly hard hit compared to other engineering this recession, since it involved the deflating of a real estate / construction bubble. It was relatively mild for computer science, at least compared to recession in 2001-2002 when the tech bubble deflated.</p>
<p>I haven’t seen any signs of the outlook for the construction industry getting worse. There are articles out there that say that while times will still be tough, the worst is behind us. My company (construction management) has started getting work again, and are on the short list for more upcoming projects.</p>
<p>The construction industry has always been volatile short-term, but there hasn’t been anything like this in recent times. So, yes, I would say a 2006 grad is luckier than 2009 grad in that the older person had more opportunities (assuming all else being equal).</p>
<p>“The Census Bureau says construction spending fell 2.5 percent in December from November and was down 6.4 percent from December 2009.”</p>
<p>
Of course. But who’s likely to be better off, a lazy civil engineering grad from 2006 who at least got money and work experience before being laid off, or a hardworking civil engineering grad from 2009 who probably still can’t find any work related to his major?</p>
<p>The construction industry will get back to normal one day. But even if the industry starts booming tomorrow, companies would rather hire a 2011 grad than a 2009 grad.</p>
<p>Disclosure: I haven’t graduated yet, so I’m not bitter. However, I do pity those who had the misfortune of graduating in 2009 or in 2010.</p>
I don’t see a point in trying to make such a comparison. </p>
<p>
I agree, assuming you meant neither person has had relevant experience. At some point, the 2009 grad will have to give up and go into another field. Right after the dot com bubble, I met a few CS graduates who ended up working in the construction sector because they couldn’t find any relevant jobs at the time.</p>
<p>
The Architecture Billings Index is at it’s highest point since 2007. </p>
I’ve just read the whole article. Wow, this guy’s talent was off the charts! Even with a lot of hard work, very few highschoolers are capable of getting nearly perfect SAT scores, top grades, and a 4:23 mile. </p>
<p>You’re saying that he should have put in more effort in high school, but did he really need to work harder? The results he achieved with laziness were more than enough to get him into a good school with a full scholarship. Even if he did try harder, what more could he have possibly done? Be honest, how many of you would slack off if you were in that situation?</p>
<p>That’s what I should’ve been doing. I should’ve been ■■■■■■■■ universities for unemployed civ majors, looking for a free assistant. That’d make my life a lot easier.</p>
<p>His mistake was going to a school where they stressed theory and expected students to be on their own when looking for jobs. If he actually bothered to do the research on job placement rates for various colleges, he would have chosen a college like Cal Poly SLO and would now be working as an engineer.</p>
<p>
After reading the thread that I linked to earlier in the post, I’d say it all makes sense now.</p>
<p>Not necessarily. The story makes the person in question to be smart but lazy, with the latter characteristic not being a good one to have graduating into a recession. While Cal Poly SLO had an impressively high placement rate for civil engineering graduates even in 2009, a relatively lazy student there would likely be one of the minority who did not get a job.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A 2009 graduate would have entered school in 2005, just as real estate and construction was getting very bubbly and frothy. So a civil engineering graduate then would probably have gotten a job even if s/he barely tried to find one.</p>