This is an area in which the free market works quite well. If most English majors had superb writing and critical thinking skills, employers would be clammoring for them. There was a time in the past when that happened. Corporations do act in their own best interests to acquire the employees who will be most productive for their corporate purposes. The fact that there is limited employer demand suggests that many such graduates now lack those skills, given that we can agree these skills are recognized as valuable to companies.
In recognition of this, students flock to majors in which employment is both easier to obtain and possibly more lucrative. Just supply and demand.
2 Likes
What on earth are you talking about here? Whom is an objective case pronoun that would be used in the direct object, indirect object, and object of the preposition.
4 Likes
What is troubling to me is some companies are using temp or contract writers, and even moving to AI based content, even reducing the gig work for writers.
Seems to me that the entertainment writers strike is an alarm bell for people who seek to rely on writing skills to make a living.
2 Likes
I donât fundamentally disagree with you, but here is my slightly different take. I donât think itâs necessarily because students generally lack superb critical thinking and writing skills, a point on which I maintain an agnostic view. I think another plausible explanation is that corps donât hire for that anymore for a couple of reasons: (1) they assume the technical people, whose skills they view as more immediately necessary, will also have critical reasoning abilities; and (2) they donât really know they need people with good writing skills. Said differently, I may disagree with your comment that âwe can agree these skills are recognized as valuable to companies.â To amplify #2, most people have passable writing skills, and I would confidently guess that 99% of CEOs, CFOs and COOs wouldnât know a split-infinitive if it hit them in the face, and themselves make many technical writing mistakes. Whoâs going to correct them? Unless youâre being hired by communications, good writing is something discovered in people over time and is viewed as a bonus. âYou know, Jane is an excellent writer.â But of course nobody administered a writing test when Jane was hired. It just worked out that way, and later on, one of her talents was noticed and, thereafter, exploited. Now of course, you canât be a disaster such that your e-mails are commented upon as problematic. But thatâs a much, much lower bar than I think weâre talking about here.
Corporate communications isnât exactly the best writing either. You donât need to attend Kenyon and write for four years to make it in corporate America, even as someone who writes a lot of company communication material. Itâs fairly basic English and a whole lot of lingo.
As an aside, Iâm not sure I understand your supply/demand argument. As I read you post, it seems youâre saying there isnât a lot of supply out there, and therefore there has resulted reduced demand. I donât follow that line of thought.
5 Likes
I agree with you. And since demand for English majors has declined, fewer will purse that course resulting in less supply
1 Like
Or (3) the writing skills that employers want involve writing about business or technical topics, rather than writing about fictional literature. Employers may be expecting that students in other majors have had practice writing within their majors. In other words, writing skills practice is not necessarily limited to English or literature majors, so English or literature majors are not seen as being uniquely different and better compared to those in other majors in this respect.
3 Likes
I think thatâs probably right. Though if I were making the decision and really good and solid writing skills were something important in the hiring search, I would cheat towards the English major writer and feel confident that they would pick up the lingo and idiosyncratic aspects of the business to inform their writing. Business writing is really not all that hard to pick up. We get non-business people here who run through Communications who have no clue about our industry or markets or other pertinent esoterica who nonetheless pick it up straight away if theyâre otherwise smart and conscientiousness.
I agree that these people are not limited to the English or Literature majors. Philosophy is another one that comes to mind that tends to produce pretty good writers. Whatever the major, I firmly believe that, unless you have a real gift, you have to write papers for a grade in college, and you have to do a fair amount of it, before you can expect to be a really strong writer. Otherwise, you tend to find yourself in the passable category.
1 Like
Compared to an English or literature major, a philosophy major may have an advantage due to greater practice with logic and precision, but without going so far as to be difficult to read for a general reader.
1 Like
At least I would like to think so. OTOH, any artistic or creative âout of the boxâ type intellectual muscle development may favor the literature kids a smidge.
But youâre correct; a nimble turn of a phrase isnât as valued in the Philosophy department as soundness of logic throughout oneâs written work. And it takes more than being consistent with other things youâve written. The Philosophy faculty will challenge the entire piece even if itâs consistent. If they think your premises are crap, then consistency wonât save you.
Onion -
What you are claiming is true of about 80% of majors across the academy, not just philosophy - some even in the sciences. Most majors, if the person does not get an advanced degree, have lower income potential initially and limited out of college direct job application.
Iâm not an advocate of debt, but I also realize that a BA has 124 credits in it. Students can double major if they wish, they can major in X and minor in Y, and they can major in X and takes lots of free elective courses in Y. So, itâs not an either/or situation.
Beyond that, I personally know a lot of philosophy majors who found their way inside this job or that (not professing philosophy), moved around, moved up, are doing quite well, and donât regret their philosophy major. I know some who went into law, and theyâre making good money. I donât know any who are unreasonably saddled with debt, either.
Of course, many will respond and say that such a kiddo should double or triple major just in money making subjects. Thatâs fine - if thatâs what that kid wants to do, and how they want to see education. But then itâs not about coming out of college with the ability to pay back debt, itâs about maximizing income as high as one can. Thatâs a different argument, and someone who doesnât see the point of college that way surely isnât irrational, whereas making choices that leave one crippled by debt may well be.
Ah, subject vs. object.
Then we agree. If the philosophy major helps you earn enough money and you like it, go for it. Thatâs exactly what I said before.
I never said âonly major in STEMâ. In fact there are way too many biology majors in the job market â probably premeds/prevets who didnât get into med/vet school. Iâve seen poor placement from biology, and that is STEM.
I said to have future income very seriously in mind when choosing a major or even whether to attend college. If one doesnât expect to complete a marketable major, maybe one should not even take on the debt. And if philosophy is a marketable major, it may be fairly difficult â I suppose lots of reading and papers, logical argument must be understood and original arguments produced, etc. (Although logic as taught in the philosophy department is typically a whole semester covering a few weeks of Boolean algebra as taught in the math department.)
The market seems to come into equilibrium, and the easy majors are rarely the most useful ones. But thatâs just a general observation, and there may be an exception.
Sure - I would not tell anyone to go 100,000 in debt for a philosophy degree. But I wouldnât tell them to go into serious debt for any undergrad degree. Even for 50k, unless it was engineering. So, this argument hit almost all majors in my view.
My point is different - that engagement with philosophy as an undergrad doesnât need to be a cost analysis issue (will it make me $$?). Double major in something immediately practical and in philosophy. Or minor in it. Or just take courses in it. Engagement with philosophy is not a one way ticket to poverty.
All that said, I do think that philosophy is an ROI degree, in the sense that it arms the person with pretty advanced critical thinking skills, and people like that tend to find their way into and then up the ladder of many jobs (like the people I mentioned). Of course, it has a lot of benefits apart from income or job advancement, but thatâs a whole different issue.
So if the main point here is not to solely major in a field that has no immediate high payoff if one take on lots of debt, yeah. I agree. But if the point is not to major in philosophy at all, or not to engage with it, or to get rid of it because it doesnât immediately impact earnings, then no.
It does mean that parent financial circumstances and choices not only constrain the studentâs choice of college, but also choice of major.
1 Like
Definitely true, on both counts. But once weâre not talking about taking on high debt, I donât think it really matters much what you major in, unless your aim is to maximize income (then pick engineering, period). But if large debt is not the issue, and the aim is to earn a good salary (not the highest one), live a good life, and be happy with your career - it seems pretty open to me.
What is considered in demand in several industries is excellent presentation making skills, more so than writing skills. Those are highly valued.
1 Like
Note that in some states like PA and NH, the average student loan debt is around $39k, so high debt is common, and many students are constrained in their choice of college and major by the need to pay off the debt that may be the only way to go to college.
I could not agree more. If you can present, you can make up a lot of ground on much smarter people in a typical corporate setting. With that said, I think good writers make good presenters because it draws in large measure on overlapping skills. Of course, a key variable that has to be in place is confidence and ability to stand up in front of other people and occupy their attention. A lot of people with plenty to say fumble and stumble and completely bungle those opportunities. Smart people tend to look at public speaking as something they can handle easily, and if Iâve seen it once Iâve seen it 1,000 times they also fall down hard when they have to go actually do it.
1 Like
I think math majors (not necessarily applied math if thatâs a separate major) do well. But that would be harder than engineering for most people. Some kinds of engineering are more lucrative than others. Civil engineering doesnât pay so much. Petroleum engineering is boom-and-bust.
And not everyone will succeed in completing an engineering degree, even if it is such a payoff. Someone without the right skills might end up ahead by going down a different path, or at least being willing to accept it when life is telling them it isnât working out.
Of course, study some other things along the way. An undergrad degree program is supposed to force that anyway. Hopefully you find something interesting in your gen-ed courses and develop new interests. Maybe even a major.
Any intended major announced by a high school student should be considered very tentative, maybe a wild guess. They have to find out what they like and even more importantly, what theyâre able to do well enough to graduate.
Colleges are not department stores, and parents are not the âcustomersâ. An education is not something that you go, pay for, and then you walk home with it in the trunk of your car.
If that were true, every student who failed because they spent college drunk on the floor of their dorms can sue their college. After all, they paid for an âeducationâ, and they left college without an education.
The clients of colleges are society as a whole. Colleges provide the opportunities for students to obtain an education. They do not, or at least should not, provide an education based on what a bunch of parents want.
As to what an education is, just like everything else, you rely on experts to decide this. The experts are the academics,and their decisions are not based on what makes a small number of clients happy. What next? âDoctors should treat all of their patients based on what the a small number of wealthy parents of patients decide is the best for everybodyâ.
We also should not determine what is being taught based on what was taught 50 years ago.
Education changes, just like everything else does. Claiming that certain educational methodologies are good because they were practiced for 100 years is no different than claiming the the same medicine should be practiced because it was practices for 100 years.
Humanities is not the teaching and research of Old European Cultures. English is the study of the English language and the English Language culture. This culture is a living changing entity, and remaining stuck in the past with a bunch of authors who were famous 100 or 50 years ago is not âEnglishâ.
6 Likes