<p>
</p>
<p>That’s my concern for those with balanced test scores and balanced grades. Changing majors in college or careers later on is fine and more power to them, but is that inevitable?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know it’s of limited utilities but am not sure we cannot read more into it especially when a test is taken cold.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>xrCalico23 is having fun into the night of course, not struggling with anything.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good education in three fields in 4 years!? Good Lord.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is imposed by the kids’ need to find a job post graduation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You stay up till 3 am to pursue something you love.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why is middle of the second year the magical tripping point?</p>
<p>“That’s my concern for those with balanced test scores and balanced grades. Changing majors in college or careers later on is fine and more power to them, but is that inevitable?”</p>
<p>Why would you try to stop it? If their interests change, they change. Maybe one of my kids will discover an interest in art history. Doesn’t matter to me what they major in, as long as they understand the job prospects. Should it? Should I insist that they stay in chemistry and poli sci respectively since that’s what they like as hs seniors?</p>
<p>The middle of the second year isn’t a magical tripping point, but it seems to work. It gives a student time to get introduced to courses that take him past the intellectual impoverishment of most high school curriculums, at least some exposure to fields he may not have known existed (or may have fantasized to be different than they are, and a chance to learn what areas his institution teaches particularly well at the present moment.</p>
<p>Of course, a student can always NOT change his plans, and some keep to plans they formed in high school, or even earlier. Just not that many. And if a student finds an area of interest after his second year, it is usually hard to complete the requirements for a major and to graduate on time. That’s why I think leading U.S. undergraduate institutions try to direct students to declare a major by the end of their second year (and many do it before then), but not to encourage them (and in some cases not even to permit them) to declare their major in their first years.</p>
<p>Personal testimony – my family’s experience: Of the four of us, only one flew through college in a straight line. And no one has ever had permanent work for which his or her college major prepared him (although my youngest is still trying – he plans to pursue a PhD in his major field). Our college majors gave us intellectual tools that have been nicely rewarded, but not specific professional competencies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No problem there. Changing majors within a field or between related fields is reasonable and perhaps that’s what happened to most people. Jobs 20-30 years down the road don’t exist today, and a solid training in areas where one’s interests lie will prepare her/him to adapt.</p>
<p>The problem is pre-med in pre-law out, for example, or marine biologist in IT out. I’m not sure one understands him-/herself well enough in such a case, and the danger for seemingly balanced students could be higher.</p>
<p>Short of getting struck by lightning and woke up a pianist (from Oliver Sacks’ book), interests change should happen for a reason. The problem is that we parents may not know really well our own kids.</p>
<p>There’s nothing you can do about that, though. It’s a pointless thing to worry about in the abstract.</p>
<p>
What’s the problem there? Honestly, I don’t see it at all. The examples are particularly bad, since neither pre-med nor pre-law constitutes an actual major, and pre-law means nothing whatsoever – the only prerequisite for law school is having satisfied someone’s requirements for a bachelor’s degree, and I bet even that can be waived where appropriate. I know at least one lawyer whose undergraduate degree is a BFA.</p>
<p>When people change, there’s usually a good reason. My sister changed from geology to Spanish lit because she couldn’t make it through a required physics course. My best friend in college went from history to geology when he fell in love with Rocks For Jocks, and later spent years working on environmental policy for Environmental Defense. One of the most successful people I know was an astronomy grad student when he founded what became a leading manufacturer of fiber-optics network equipment. Another went from music to French literature in college, and later ran one of the world’s largest artist-management companies.</p>
<p>"problem is pre-med in pre-law out, for example, or marine biologist in IT out. I’m not sure one understands him-/herself well enough in such a case, and the danger for seemingly balanced students could be "</p>
<p>Danger of what? I don’t understand what danger you mean. It is not as though you are married to the curriculum you take in college.</p>
<p>As for lawyers, I know more than a few who were theater majors as undergrads.</p>
<p>“No problem there. Changing majors within a field or between related fields is reasonable and perhaps that’s what happened to most”</p>
<p>Are you suggesting that changing from American history to Eiropean history is reasonable, but changing from American history to physics isn’t reasonable?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. I like JHS’s examples much better except the “geology to Spanish lit” and Pizzagirl’s “American history to physics”. In these two cases, I think the students went in without a careful self evaluation. </p>
<p>Again, there are people like [George</a> R. Price](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Price]George”>George R. Price - Wikipedia), a trained physical chemist (BS/PhD, UChicago) became a population geneticist with an equation named after him (heard on RadioLab). How many kids are like that?</p>
<p>But interests change over time. How can you claim it was due to not enough self evaluation? Why do you want to lock people into what they happen to like at 16, 17, 18? Seems to defeat the purpose of a college as a means for being exposed to fields you may not have known about or that are typically not in hs curriculums.</p>
<p>I think there’s often a big difference between high school math and science and college math and science. I’ve known a number of students who were good at math in high school who realized that they just couldn’t compete with the real math geeks in college. Especially if you are coming from a small school you may never have been really challenged before.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s why an accurate assessment in HS is not easy. All the discussion here make me think that colleges are significantly different, even we often put them together, e.g., big 10 (now 12?) or Ives.</p>
<p>Somehow I believe interests are related to innate abilities which wouldn’t reveal to us easily.</p>
<p>It seems really important to you, lake42ks, that people lock in to something early on and never change. That’s not the real world.</p>
<p>“Again, there are people like George R. Price, a trained physical chemist (BS/PhD, UChicago) became a population geneticist with an equation named after him (heard on RadioLab). How many kids are like that?”</p>
<p>So what? I want my kids to be happy in what they do. I don’t particularly GAS if they become notable in their field the way this gentleman above did. What’s the freaking’ big deal if they train as X and ultimately migrate to Y?</p>
<p>Some, IMHO are totally missing the point of this thread. I’ve dealt with students learning styles & brain function for over 25 years. The very top students are high in both verbal & nonverbal intelligence. The next tier of students are high in one or the other. The average students are average in both, & the low functioining students are below average in both. Of course this doesn’t factor in work habits, attention span, etc.The point is that knowing what kind of learner you are helps you gravitate to a career that matches your style & thus gives you a better chance for success. All the interest in the world isn’t going to make a student with a 95 nonverbal IQ be a good engineer, just as a student with a 95 verbal IQ isn’t going to be successful being a speech writer. We all tend to gravitate towards tasks we are good at. The high nonverbal kid will love to build things, tinker with gadjets, want to know how things work. The high verbal kid will read, write, play make believe, etc. Students should be encouraged to follow their interests. However in the rare case where their interest doesn’t match up well with their skill set, they should receive some career guidance. A good example is a girl I did a re evaluation on this year. She had a 120 nonverbal / 97 verbal IQ. Says she wants to be a teacher. I looked at her course schedule & noticed she was taking an art class that designed jewelry, etc. I went to her teacher & inquired about her natural ability in the tasks they were doing. As I suspected the teacher said she was the most talented student in the class. I asked the teacher to mention to the student the different areas of art (graphic design, etc.) & how she tought she would excell in those areas. I did the same & after a couple of months the student is seriously looking at a major in one of those areas.</p>
<p>It always amuses me how people can remember there SAT score from 5, 10, 20 years ago…really?</p>