“Do students who choose to major in different fields have different academic aptitudes? This question is worth investigating for many reasons, including an understanding of what fields top students choose to pursue, the diversity of talent across various fields, and how this might reflect upon the majors and occupations a culture values.” …
Just for fun and for what it’s worth.
http://qz.com/334926/your-college-major-is-a-pretty-good-indication-of-how-smart-you-are/
When I was a student, I recall that the kids who couldn’t cut it in their initial choice of major switched to business, sociology or psych.
Some of the sharpest critical thinkers I knew were English majors & history majors.
There are countless possibilities. Another is a kid who opts for an “easy” major (and, obviously, X may find something undemanding, while Y finds it difficult) to accommodate worthwhile – or frivolous – time demands. Some of the smartest individuals I’ve ever known, majored in near-fluff areas, to have more time for college fun (and many of them did astonishingly well in professional schools, some of the highest stature).
Majoring in whatever the college’s “easy A” major may be a strategy taken by pre-law and pre-med students who are aiming for the highest possible GPA due to law and medical schools’ focus on GPA, at least for initial screening of applicants.
If we’re going to try to correlate something to how “smart” a person is, then we’d better come up with less problematic definitions of “smart” than a bunch of standardized tests. Sheesh.
^^Don’t like the GRE, huh?
No. I kinda love standardized tests, but it’s not exactly controversial that they don’t (and can’t) measure “intelligence,” whatever that is.
It’s a correlation/causation issue. Perhaps the things measured in the standardized tests happen to place more value on concrete intellectual skills than things like passion, creativity, insight, and acumen?
They have a high degree of correlation with IQ. Do you think the correlation is higher or lower than “choice of major”?
IQ also can’t measure intelligence, nor is there anything approaching a consensus on what “intelligence” is. There’s ample scholarship on the subject.
I’m going to go to college for engineering, so… yay?
“Ample” meaning, it’s time to quit? Scientists continue to make investigation into it while some people continue to want to deny everything about it.
Let me ask you a question; let’s say that all of a sudden, there is a breakthrough and a “consensus” emerges. What do you really think that will change? You will still be who you are, won’t you?
@JustOneDad - I’m not at all saying it’s time to quit, just that claims to correlate things to intelligence must first show a reasonable definition of intelligence, and consensus in the scientific community would be a great start. Unless that’s accomplished, claims like the ones in the link are really just showing correlation between major and scores on various standardized tests.
If there is a breakthrough and consensus emerges, that will surprise me but will make a whole lot of studies possible–it would be a remarkable achievement that would help us understand a lot about ourselves.
As for me, personally, well, I’m not sure I’m ever who I am–like Heraclitus’ river, you can never step on the same @marvin100 twice 
Well, people will always want to misinterpret the results, too.
Let’s take the 2005 study about the 1.2 million who took the GRE between 2002 and 2005. We have a nice bar chart. Let’s set aside, for a moment, the fact that the authors averaged together the math and verbal scores for some baffling reason. There’s no indication in the article whether or not there are statistically significant differences between any of those numbers - in other words, whether there’s more variability between people with different intended majors than there is within the actual majors themselves. I would imagine that there is probably some significant difference between 492 (education) and engineering (594). But are the 30 points between humanities majors and computer science majors meaningful in any way?
But even that’s irrelevant. I’m willing to concede that, on average, more intelligent students (or at least students who score more highly on the GRE) probably gravitate towards engineering, physical science, and math/computer science majors - which are generally more remunerative than education, agriculture, or psychology. That does not make the headline of this article - “Your college major is a pretty good indication of how smart you are” - remotely close to true. It’s an example of the ecological fallacy. Just because something is, on average, true doesn’t mean that it applies to individuals.
The ecological inference fallacy applies to statements about individuals. If you read this as applying only to yourself, then I can see how that might be correct.
However, because the pronoun “your” is often used to refer to all members of a group, I would argue that it does, indeed, qualify as “remotely close to true”, particularly when used as a mass media headline.
I imagine that the way to re-establish yourself as an individual would be to actually take an IQ test and demonstrate that your individual results fall either above or below the average for your group.
I would also point out that the global advertising industry thrives on this fallacy to the tune of about a half trillion dollars yearly.
Several comments to this thread seem to ignore a VERY prevalent undergraduate phenomenon, one which has existed for many generations. These comments are premised on the concept that all/many freshman/undergraduates are mature individuals and serious students, who prudently assess their long-futures at age seventeen or twenty, and then select a major based on this judicious evaluation. However, my experience suggests this FAR from universally true.
Instead, I believe a LOT of undergraduates have no legitimate understanding of what their futures may/will hold (hence, the majority alter majors at least once) AND they often want their college experiences to be a balanced combination of learning (in and beyond the classroom), of maturation, of fun, and so forth. These individuals may be every bit as intelligent as the “grinds” who major in demanding disciplines and who are especially diligent students. Nevertheless, they may believe – and their rationales are not without considerable historical foundation – that enjoyment with their friends, or a bridge game at the dorm or the union, or leadership development through a social or extracurricular organization, or a varsity sport, or a fraternity party after an athletic victory (etc.) can be as (or more) valuable than extra hours in the electrical engineering lab. Since they seek a fully integrated undergraduate experience, they may intentionally major in less challenging arenas, not because they lack cognitive ability, but because they understand that (for example) a 3.4 GPA is much easier to achieve in marketing than in mechanical engineering. In essence, this is the age-old “Gentleman’s C” approach to college.
I take no position in this thread regarding which undergraduate philosophy (or – much more probably – a balance between the two) is optimal; obviously, that decision will always be individually dependent. Rather, I only suggest that very bright (but less focused and possibly more well-rounded) twenty-ish year olds may knowingly opt for relatively undemanding majors because they believe that it serves them better in the short- and/or the long-term.
In sum, the fundamental difference in the major selected may be appreciably more founded on maturity, self-discipline, long-term goal orientation, parental expectation, social adeptness/awkwardness, a belief in and desire for a balanced and well-rounded collegiate experience, and so forth, rather than on “intelligence” per se.
^ a bridge game? College kids play bridge?
There are also not a lot of opportunities in the US to show people why STEM is more interesting than music or sociology. Sure you can take chem or bio but it is not the same as taking an actual engineering class in high school where you build something so you get a real sense of WHY being an engineer is worth it. So I know people who got 5s on the Physics AP and are now done with science. They could have been engineers but do not see why