Support NeoGAF

[teh_pwn]

Freshmen engineering classes were EASY. I did more advanced stuff in high school. If these guys can't take freshmen engineering classes, they aren't going to survive Junior year stuff.

I think the problem is that most high schools are jail for kids. Memorizing the periodic table does not teach you a damn thing needed to problem solve or explain collected data.

 

[teh_pwn]

All the scientific researches and engineering marvels have to be funded somehow. The finance guys are the ones who get that side done. That's why they get paid a lot of money

And I can invest in stocks by myself online. Sure some guys are needed to wire this transaction, but no more than a checker in a grocery store rings up my items.

Also taxes are a large part of scientific funding, and funding has been cut. No science => no engineering => no productivity gains => no market growth.

 

[usea]

At my university, drop/switch rate wasn't too high for my major (comp sci). I think the department felt the pressure to keep and graduate more students. I knew a dozen people who graduated and could not program.

I found the curriculum and courses fantastic though. You get out of it what you put in.

 

[NetMapel]

And I can invest in stocks by myself online. Sure some guys are needed to wire this transaction, but no more than a checker in a grocery store rings up my items.

Also taxes are a large part of scientific funding, and funding has been cut. No science => no engineering => no productivity gains => no market growth.

The stocks you've bought online have already went through the IPO process. The issue is, if you're trying to start something big, where do you get your first initial funding ? From the bank, most likely, who have to have gotten their money from other investors. Companies such as Pixar, Facebook and Google all needed angel investment in order for them to become the way they are now. Would you be able to spot those companies at their infancy and invest in them yourself ?

I obviously agree that people who came up with the original ideas and researches should be well compensated and all, but how would you go about determining the pay scale for all the professions then ?

 

[teh_pwn]

The stocks you've bought online have already went through the IPO process. The issue is, if you're trying to start something big, where do you get your first initial funding ? From the bank, most likely, who have to have gotten their money from other investors. Companies such as Pixar, Facebook and Google all needed angel investment in order for them to become the way they are now. Would you be able to spot those companies at their infancy and invest in them yourself ?

I obviously agree that people who came up with the original ideas and researches should be well compensated and all, but how would you go about determining the pay scale for all the professions then ?

I'm not arguing that financials doesn't require talent. I'm arguing that it's been done and there isn't room for innovation. There was some for the internet, but beyond that it was all fluff and now we're paying for it. Creating derivatives to bet against subprime mortgages that you've labeled as AAA isn't innovation, it's fraud. The fundamentals of financials hasn't changed in decades. I don't know enough about the industry, but based on what I know it would be prudent to nationalize banking (loans, savings), let good investing businesses like Vanguard continue to be free market, and let the incapable investment bankers die under capitalism.

Because scientific research is largely subsidized, governments are going to have to bid higher wages to keep talent. Well, I'm not entirely sure how wages are decided, but somehow they're going to have to be competitive. About half of our scientists are brought in under a visa program. Their country's are starting to have opportunities for their talent, so unless we increase wages or actually teach kids what science is (it's not a table, it's a method that requires extreme scrutiny against bias) and how to think we're going to fall behind fairly rapidly over the next 20 years.

 

[Something Wicked]

At my school, it was called "The Management Switch." Granted it was a heavily engineering focused school, just too many kids were not properly prepared in high school. Such kids should have retained much more from their high school chemistry, physics, and calculus courses, as the freshman college level classes were intended as being more so "refreshers" than actual introductory ones.

 

[Zzoram]

The sad reality of the world is that research scientists or engineers make a pittance compared to bankers, despite contributing far more to the world. It's hard to attract the best people to a job that is under appreciated and poorly compensated.

 

[Nerevar]

I'm sure it's been said in this thread, the problem isn't necessarily that STEM classes are too hard, it's that non-STEM classes are too easy. With the state of grade inflation amongst most top-tier universities and the way our society reacts to a transcript, it's no wonder someone drops their stem courses where they're barely pulling a C for an easy A in the humanities.

 

[Tornado Condor]

Stem fields are hard, yo.

 

[Zzoram]

Stem fields are hard, yo.

The problem is that STEM fields are under appreciated and under compensated.

In America, to be considered a success and get rich, you need to be a banker or lawyer or management. Nobody gives two shits about engineers or researchers who actually do all the work that makes the world a a continually improving place, and their pay is dwarfed by that of people who don't create any value. If a team of researchers create a new treatment for breast cancer, it's the CEO that gets a multimillion dollar bonus, the researchers just get their $70K and no respect. Nobody will know their names, but everyone will applaud the corporation and it's CEO.

Knowing this, and how much harder it is to become a successful researcher, why would you ever do science degrees over accounting plus an MBA for a simpler path to way more money?

 

[Zapages]

I still can't find a job in my field and I have double BS in Biology and Biochemistry and MS in Biology with a concentration in Neuroscience. :\

 

[Zzoram]

I still can't find a job in my field and I have double BS in Biology and Biochemistry and MS in Biology with a concentration in Neuroscience. :\

You'd more likely have a job if you were an accountant or MBA :\

 

[Byakuya769]

Stem fields are hard, yo.

As someone who switched post grad, I definitely agree. They are unquestionably harder than anything that you can get with a BA and any business degree. However, in my experiences, the difficulty for me just came from the large amount of cold rote memorization that I never felt any the wiser for. Ask an english major about some of the great literary works, and they'll likely remember the finest details of a novel they read their sophomore year a decade after. While taking organic chemistry or physiology I would ask my father, a physician, the most basic of questions about that shit, and he wouldn't have a clue.

The second problem, as already discussed, but I just want to add weight to it, is the fact that STEMs really do not pay that well outside of engineering (I wasn't going to take on another 4 year degree) or becoming a physician, lazy student that had the mcat scores but not the grades. On balance, for the difficulty I don't think it pays. If you're intelligent and there's something you would be motivated to learn, I think you can find other areas that will net you a higher benefit. And if they don't, they'll at least insulate you with a much higher GPA and the ability to test into competitive post grad programs.

My two cents.

You'd more likely have a job if you were an accountant or MBA :

Yep, and both degrees would have been a cakewalk compared to the shit he had to study.

 

[dudeworld]

You'd more likely have a job if you were an accountant or MBA :\

a more in-demand field has more jobs available?

 

[Something Wicked]

The sad reality of the world is that research scientists or engineers make a pittance compared to bankers, despite contributing far more to the world. It's hard to attract the best people to a job that is under appreciated and poorly compensated.

Eh, a very tiny fraction of business/finance majors ever come close to sniffing the upper managements of large commercial/investment banks. With a PhD in a science/engineering field and some years of research, one has much more flexibility in forging his/her own career and the potential of starting a very profitable business.

I still can't find a job in my field and I have double BS in Biology and Biochemistry and MS in Biology with a concentration in Neuroscience. :\

Where are you now and where are you looking for jobs? One problem is that smaller start-ups do not want to deal with relocation issues and costs. You may have to consider moving to an area with high-demand in your field without having a definite job lined up. I know- it's a risky option, but it's something to consider.

 

[Zzoram]

a more in-demand field has more jobs available?

Just saying that it sucks you have to be in the financial sector to get a job and make money.

 

[Zapages]

Where are you now and where are you looking for jobs? One problem is that smaller start-ups do not want to deal with relocation issues and costs. You may have to consider moving to an area with high-demand in your field without having a definite job lined up. I know- it's a risky option, but it's something to consider.

I am in NJ... I have applied to areas such as California and Arizona, but I am mostly applying in the tri-state region. I have not even gotten an interview. *sad* I am willing to move if the pay is good.

Skills that I have experience in:

Cell Culture (primary culture 2D, 3D, mouse cancer cell line)
Molecular Biology (PCR, RT PCR, etc)
Bio-informatics (too many to list -working with proteins and their DNA/Binding, protein binding sites)
Light/Transmission Electron Microscopy

 

[User Name Here]

I took a bio-informatics and calculus class.... I did my part!

 

[Lonely1]

However, in my experiences, the difficulty for me just came from the large amount of cold rote memorization that I never felt any the wiser for.

Memorization will not take you far in Mathematics and Physics.

 

[Loki]

Just saying that it sucks you have to be in the financial sector to get a job and make money.

That's what happens when you have, like, 70% of the nation's money tied up in the financial services sector. It's a lamentable condition.

I partially agree with you (and I say that as a law/MBA guy myself) but how would you propose changing compensation? I can't imagine any sort of government regulation that would work.

A broad societal paradigm shift. After all, the devaluation of the sciences relative to finance/business didn't happen overnight, and neither will the reverse. 25-35 years ago, an engineer could be relatively assured of a better lifestyle than a finance major on average - not so in the last 10-15 years. There's a reason that shift happened, and it's tied to a ton of cultural and economic factors. There's no easy solution, but then again, despite the gravity of this situation (lack of STEM grads and STEM compensation levels), it's a mere drop in the bucket compared to the larger systemic issues that movements like OWS are attempting to address. This country needs broad social change of the sort it hasn't seen in more than a generation.

 

[Dennis]

The problem is that STEM fields are under appreciated and under compensated.

In America, to be considered a success and get rich, you need to be a banker or lawyer or management. Nobody gives two shits about engineers or researchers who actually do all the work that makes the world a a continually improving place, and their pay is dwarfed by that of people who don't create any value. If a team of researchers create a new treatment for breast cancer, it's the CEO that gets a multimillion dollar bonus, the researchers just get their $70K and no respect. Nobody will know their names, but everyone will applaud the corporation and it's CEO.

Knowing this, and how much harder it is to become a successful researcher, why would you ever do science degrees over accounting plus an MBA for a simpler path to way more money?

I agree with everything in this excellent post.

 

[Sol..]

Stem fields are hard, yo.

They are hard, but the organization of these programs are rigid and built to weed people out early. Because there's a lot of fun shit available later on in the program that people are never exposed to that probably could be available earlier if they would strip some prerequisites. These classes could be greatly uplifting for students.

 

[Sharp]

The sad reality of the world is that research scientists or engineers make a pittance compared to bankers, despite contributing far more to the world. It's hard to attract the best people to a job that is under appreciated and poorly compensated.

Bankers don't actually make all that much money these days, contrary to popular belief.

 

[Zzoram]

Bankers don't actually make all that much money these days, contrary to popular belief.

At least they have jobs. Science grads are struggling pretty badly right now. One guy who did a Biochemistry degree with co-op so he had experience at several job placements had to work as a paint powder packer, then a janitor, before finally landing a chemistry job 2 years after graduation. Now he's planning to do an MBA because there isn't much room for advancement as a chemist, you have to be a manager to make money.

 

[NetMapel]

That 1% vs 99% ratio applies to finance/accounting grads too though. It's not like all finance grads or accounting grads graduate and make multi million dollars. Only the absolute top grads reach that kind of pay scale while the rest are pretty much working hard just like the rest of us.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Oh sure split it up if you want. If the kid wants to be flipping burgers or whatever why should he be challenged. That last sentence sounds sarcastic, but its kinda not. Anyway, if you had to choose one though i'd rather over-challenge our kids than under. It can't hurt them in anything they do.

real talk: it can because the punishment for failure is high.

 

[Zzoram]

That 1% vs 99% ratio applies to finance/accounting grads too though. It's not like all finance grads or accounting grads graduate and make multi million dollars. Only the absolute top grads reach that kind of pay scale while the rest are pretty much working hard just like the rest of us.

Oh I'm sure that most finance people have to work hard, that's not the point. It's just a better career option than STEM, which I think is a sad state of affairs. You're more likely to get a job and more likely to be paid well as an accountant or banker than as a chemist or biologist.

 

[Zzoram]

real talk: it can because the punishment for failure is high.

Asking more of students only makes them better. The current attitude of asking less and less and if some people still don't achieve, asking even less is not the path to the future.

 

[Byakuya769]

Memorization will not take you far in Mathematics and Physics.

Don't know what to tell you, but that was my experience.

 

[Sharp]

Don't know what to tell you, but that was my experience.

I haven't been in a single upper-level mathematics course where memorization accomplished much of anything. Things may be different with physics though, I'm not sure.

 

[Zzoram]

Memorization helps a lot in any field, but at the upper levels of academic science, it's not enough. This is mostly true of graduate school, many bachelors aren't too demanding of critical thinking until 4th year.

 

[Tornado Condor]

I'm majoring in chemistry as an undergrad and I honestly don't see myself getting a job with a BS. I'm definitely going for the MS.

 

[Stormwatch]

I kept my major throughout college, but I witnessed many people change it after the first semester. I majored in Aviation Meteorology with Flight along with 20 other people. By the time I graduated we were down to 3 people. Everyone else either dropped out or changed their major to Aviation Management. The major required tons of math and physics course that I think a lot of people weren't prepared for.

 

[JGS]

I was under the impression that switching majors was high across several departments.

 

[Byakuya769]

I haven't been in a single upper-level mathematics course where memorization accomplished much of anything. Things may be different with physics though, I'm not sure.

Ah ok, I'm talking about the classes when most people are dropping; years 1-3.

 

[The Technomancer]

I'm sure it's been said in this thread, the problem isn't necessarily that STEM classes are too hard, it's that non-STEM classes are too easy. With the state of grade inflation amongst most top-tier universities and the way our society reacts to a transcript, it's no wonder someone drops their stem courses where they're barely pulling a C for an easy A in the humanities.

Agreed. Every non-STEM class I've taken at college has been a joke in terms of difficulty. And I'm not talking the intro freshman writing or anything, I'm talking junior and senior level classes where I hear classmates complaining about an exam being "brutal" because it required you to be vaguely familiar with the philosophies of the major thinkers we had been covering.

Also, my engineering courses have definitely gotten both easier in terms of exams and work and more conceptually complex, and I'm loving it. Even if I only come out with a 3.2 GPA because of those early semesters, the stuff I'm learning now will stick with me forever.

 

[victreeb3l]

im part of that statistic. went for pre-med, dropped out and doing art now

even though i loved the curved grades when i was still doing it, im not a big fan of it now. a 50 in organic chem was a B. this was also similar in some of the other upper level science courses. i dont think the grades should be dumbed down like that

i dont know how i feel about having a doctor who just barely made it, when it should be a field of nothing but the absolute best. then again, i never made it to med school and i dont know how its like there or how that changes people.

 

[Havok]

Agreed. Every non-STEM class I've taken at college has been a joke in terms of difficulty. And I'm not talking the intro freshman writing or anything, I'm talking junior and senior level classes where I hear classmates complaining about an exam being "brutal" because it required you to be vaguely familiar with the philosophies of the major thinkers we had been covering.

This. I'm in a junior-level Western Civ course as a senior in Neurobiology, and after the first two classes, I stopped going. I got a 100 on the midterm using only the primary material, and people all around me were complaining about how difficult it was.

Those classes need to either start expecting more out of their students or not be restricted to higher level students.

 

[Maxim726X]

Sounds like the real problem is grade inflation in social sciences and humanities, if it's making STEM majors feel stupid and switching to those classes just to get a higher GPA.

All universities should just grade on a curve for the first 2 years, with a pre-determined class average, so that the GPA distribution ends up pretty similar in every major, preventing grade inflation from causing students to change majors. The final 2 years of study can go without a grade curve so if only good students are still around, they all have the opportunity to get good grades if they work hard enough.

I was a pre-med student at a major research university... And let me tell you, my classes were curved hard. They have to be, honestly. The average for my first genetics test was a 27, with one student getting above an 80 (classically considered a B on a normal grading scale).

What pisses me off a little is to see that schools like WPI just let you get below a C THREE times without it impacting your GPA. At my school, that shit wouldn't fly for a second. If the grades below a C were removed from my GPA (all in my first semester), I would have had well over a 3.8. How is that fair?

 

[Something Wicked]

I am in NJ... I have applied to areas such as California and Arizona, but I am mostly applying in the tri-state region. I have not even gotten an interview. *sad* I am willing to move if the pay is good.

Skills that I have experience in:

Cell Culture (primary culture 2D, 3D, mouse cancer cell line)
Molecular Biology (PCR, RT PCR, etc)
Bio-informatics (too many to list -working with proteins and their DNA/Binding, protein binding sites)
Light/Transmission Electron Microscopy

Yeah, I would strongly consider looking into companies around here in metro Boston, particularly in Cambridge, MA. There are hundreds of bio-tech start-up/mid-size companies- more than the Bay Area, and certainly more than metro New York.

 

[Zzoram]

im part of that statistic. went for pre-med, dropped out and doing art now

even though i loved the curved grades when i was still doing it, im not a big fan of it now. a 50 in organic chem was a B. this was also similar in some of the other upper level science courses. i dont think the grades should be dumbed down like that

i dont know how i feel about having a doctor who just barely made it, when it should be a field of nothing but the absolute best. then again, i never made it to med school and i dont know how its like there or how that changes people.

At least in Canada, the locally trained doctors are definitely not people who "get by". You typically need at least 3.8+ GPA and an 11/11/11/Q MCAT to get an interview, on top of extracurricular leadership experience done during full course load semesters. Around 4000 people will apply to 210 spots, maybe 550 get interviewed.

 

[Hari Seldon]

I think the big problem is the pathetic math education in high school. You are babied in high school, taught by someone who knows no more math than required to teach. But when you get to university you are taught by some brilliant math phd who gives some super awesome formal lecture, but you have no idea how to learn in that style. Personally, I love learning in this style, and that is why I destroyed undergrad and grad school in engineering with near 4.0 grades. However I think I was just lucky, I don't think I'm any smarter than anyone else, I just adapted much better to the college lecture style of learning.

If you can get through the math issues, engineering is not that bad. At least EE, which is largely just applied math anyway.

 

[Zzoram]

I think the big problem is the pathetic math education in high school. You are babied in high school, taught by someone who knows no more math than required to teach. But when you get to university you are taught by some brilliant math phd who gives some super awesome formal lecture, but you have no idea how to learn in that style. Personally, I love learning in this style, and that is why I destroyed undergrad and grad school in engineering with near 4.0 grades. However I think I was just lucky, I don't think I'm any smarter than anyone else, I just adapted much better to the college lecture style of learning.

If you can get through the math issues, engineering is not that bad. At least EE, which is largely just applied math anyway.

The problem is parents and politicians dumbing down school curricula so more kids can get As and feel happy and go to college, then putting pressure on universities to dumb down their curricula and grade inflate to maintain the ego stroking.

Education is about merit, you have to work to understand, and understand to get good grades. Modern US thinking is that people deserve good grades regardless of effort or ability on their part.

 

[User 85168]

I'm a first year in aero/materials dual major. My calc 2 class lost half of its students after the first test.. and my school is supposedly academically competitive.. lol

 

[Zzoram]

If everyone passes every class, you wouldn't end up with the best people, you'd end up with a bunch of pathetically useless people.

There is nothing wrong with filtering out the crappy students.

 

[Zapages]

Yeah, I would strongly consider looking into companies around here in metro Boston, particularly in Cambridge, MA. There are hundreds of bio-tech start-up/mid-size companies- more than the Bay Area, and certainly more than metro New York.

I will try there as well. Previously, I did not have any luck there as well.

I have two page resume right now... Would you recommend me to change that?

 

[Zzoram]

I will try there as well. Previously, I did not have any luck there as well.

I have two page resume right now... Would you recommend me to change that?

cover letters do more for you than resumes, work on those instead

 

[RumblingRosco]

Did 2 years as a marketing major in undergrad, switched to nutrition/dietetics and completed that degree with a minor in chemistry in 4 years. Conducted parasite research in a biochemistry laboratory along the way. Became a fellow in grad school this fall as a PhD in food science, but my research is 90% focused on biofuel production.

So, I did the "business to STEM" route instead of what seems to be the more common "STEM to business" route. The good news is, I learned a lot about business along the way, so now I'm feeling quite a bit better about my opportunities in the future; I'll either get a job in academics, or my back-up plan in industry, or my back-up back-up plan as an entrepreneur.

STEM is such a huge area that it's semi-dumb, in my eyes, to lump statistics within the field together. Getting a BS in chemical engineering is very different (in regards to curriculum, competition, job prospects, etc) than a BS in mathematics.

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

I am a sophomore right now. Coming into college, nearly every one of my friends either planned on being a doctor or an engineer. Of course, statistically this didn't make sense, so I knew the less motivated ones would go the way of this article.

I'm currently in BME, and am trying to not get freaked out by the core classes, which are built to freak everyone out. Hopefully things will work out.

 

[The Technomancer]

Yeah, Calculus classes are almost always weed out classes, especially vector calc and linear algebra in my experience. Because honestly? Once you get to higher level courses you almost never deal with calculus as complicated as the stuff they make you do in those low level courses. My favorite example of this is Reynold's Transport Theorem for fluids, which looks like a nightmare of surface integrals and time derivatives, but reduces to extremely simple algebra 95% of the time.