Support NeoGAF

[Bubba T]

Interesting article I saw on Reddit today about parents pushing their college bound kids to STEM and business degrees.

This focus on college as job training reflects not only a misreading of the data on jobs and pay, but also a fundamental misunderstanding of the way labor markets work, the way careers develop and the purpose of higher education.

Let’s start with unemployment. A study by Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce found that in 2011 and 2012, when the economy was in the early stages of recovery, the unemployment rate for recently graduated majors in humanities and liberal arts (8.4 percent) wasn’t all that different from the jobless rates for majors in computers and math (8.3 percent), biology (7.4 percent), business (7 percent) and engineering (6.5 percent). Today, with an improved economy, the numbers for all majors are almost certainly lower.

Underemployment — the barista problem — is also overstated. When researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York looked at that issue, they found that the share of recent college graduates in low-wage jobs rose from 15 percent in 1990 to 20 percent in 2012, the latest year in the report — hardly an epidemic. They also found that over the years, about one-third of recent graduates have always worked jobs that don’t require college degrees but pay decent wages nonetheless — and that has been as true for science and business majors as for those with degrees in humanities and social sciences. Even in good times, it’s quite typical for recent college grads to take several years to find jobs that make use of their education.

Then there is the matter of pay. The first thing to say is that reports of liberal arts majors living lives of deprivation and disappointment have been greatly exaggerated. It is true that STEM and business majors earn the most, with median annual incomes between $60,000 and $80,000. But even the average humanities major, with wages of just over $50,000, earns enough to fit comfortably in the American middle class. Just as significant are the variations in incomes within majors. The top 25 percent of history and English majors earn more than the average major in science and math, while the bottom 25 percent of business majors make less than the average wages of those majoring in government and public policy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...dren-study-literature/?utm_term=.45527f9db6d6

The entire article is worth a read. The author (a public affairs professor at George Mason University) makes the case that kids shouldn't be pigeonholed into STEM and business majors by their parents, as the skills developed by liberal arts majors are valued and wanted by the labor market today. The author also tries to defuse the narrative that liberal arts majors are doomed to work at Starbucks or other low paying retail positions.

My take on the bolded sentence is that the top 25% of liberal arts students are more likely to be legacy students at elite universities, destined to work in and eventually take over their families business. The bottom 25% of business students could be less likely to have family and other connections to land them solid employment after graduation. Those students are more likely need work to pay down their student loans. I don't really have statistics to prove this point, but I believe this may be the case.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

I'm still reading, but I would wager the top 25% of those respective liberal arts majors is a significantly smaller number than it is for STEM and significantly more competitive, assuming they're academia

 

[kerotan_eater]

I don't know but it is fucked we don't take Arts seriously.

We need Art and Science in our world. Equally. The fact that the governments around the world are not taking it seriously themselves is truly saddening.

Also STEM elitist really need to shut up. I'm so tired of having to defend my area of study online and off.

You shouldn't be discouraging artists. This is how you fuck up a society.

 

[MistakenMobius]

Interesting article I saw on Reddit today about parents pushing their college bound kids to STEM and business degrees.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...dren-study-literature/?utm_term=.45527f9db6d6

The entire article is worth a read. The author (a public affairs professor at George Mason University) makes the case that kids shouldn't be pigeonholed into STEM and business majors by their parents, as the skills developed by liberal arts majors are valued and wanted by the labor market today. The author also tries to defuse the narrative that liberal arts majors are doomed to work at Starbucks or other low paying retail positions.

My take on the bolded sentence is that the top 25% of liberal arts students are more likely to be legacy students at elite universities, destined to work in and eventually take over their families business. The bottom 25% of business students could be less likely to have family and other connections to land them solid employment after graduation. Those students are more likely need work to pay down their student loans. I don't really have statistics to prove this point, but I believe this may be the case.

I think It would useful to check if there is a distribution linked to university:
Better be a major in arts in Oxbridge rather than having a business degree from the university of Bumfuck nowhere.

 

[entremet]

If you go to an Ivy League school you can major in underwater basket weaving an get an entry level job on Wall Streer making really nice dollars because of the recruiter access.

 

[BigDug13]

Once machines do all our work for us including repairing themselves, what's left for humanity to pursue outside the arts and research?

 

[Moral Panic]

Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics. Let me give you another "statistic", from the same data that this article was written from:

The top 25 percent of people who only graduated High School will earn more than the average Education, Psychology and social work or Arts graduate and are practically neck and neck with the average Humanities and liberal arts or Industrial arts, consumer services, and recreation graduate.

Massaging data like this is silly. You compare averages to averages and 25 percentiles to 25 percentiles, not mixing and matching to get the results you want. Whilst I agree with the premise that people should study what they want to do, you should do this with a full understanding of the facts. You WILL earn significantly less on average. But it's up to you to decide your own future with the understanding that money isn't everything.

 

[His Majesty]

I consciously chose to study chemistry instead of history because of job perspective. I can't speak for America but at least here in Belgium human sciences (history, art, political) offer a much lower job certainty than the exact sciences.

 

[Bubba T]

Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics. Let me give you another "statistic", from the same data that this article was written from:

The top 25 percent of people who only graduated High School will earn more than the average Education, Psychology and social work or Arts graduate and are practically neck and neck with the average Humanities and liberal arts or Industrial arts, consumer services, and recreation graduate.

Massaging data like this is silly. You compare averages to averages and 25 percentiles to 25 percentiles, not mixing and matching to get the results you want. Whilst I agree with the premise that people should study what they want to do, you should do this with a full understanding of the facts. You WILL earn significantly less on average. But it's up to you to decide your own future with the understanding that money isn't everything.

The author also compares median and mean statistics, which is also erroneous.

I don't blame parents for wanting their kids to earn a high income - many of them have sacrificed to put their kids into the position to get to college. In addition, tuition these days is way too expensive to take anything that doesn't look like a sure bet. More than a few GAFfers can tell you that.

 

[Rembrandt]

It sucks but I'm glad I can learn a lot on the side through electives and whatnot. I'm a business major but there are a few business related fields that incorporate art and whatnot which I'm thankful for.

Gotta chase the money unless you're rich or really, really passionate.

 

[GusBus]

I consciously chose to study chemistry instead of history because of job perspective. I can't speak for America but at least here in Belgium human sciences (history, art, political) offer a much lower job certainty than the exact sciences.

As it is in America. Very meretricious article in the op, as others have pointed out. You can study what you want if you get into an Ivy League school. Otherwise? Your job prospects with a BA in Art History or English coming out of fill-in-the-blank public university are quite slim. It's a sad state of affairs but pretending otherwise is delusional.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

As it is in America. Very meretricious article in the op, as others have pointed out. You can study what you want if you get into an Ivy League school. Otherwise? Your job prospects with a BA in Art History or English coming out of fill-in-the-blank public university are quite slim. It's a sad state of affairs but pretending otherwise is delusional.

Pretty much. I don't dislike the arts at all, but if you go to a random state school without a big representation, the people there with STEM degrees are looking at much better prospects. Arguably, I don't really even see the point at comparing students at good schools; most students don't go to Ivy Leagues.

 

[Foffy]

Man, Einstein's "Why Socialism" should be required reading for all college-bound people.

It's sad that college has literally becoming a job training factory and very little else, in the eyes of our culture.

Burn it down please.

 

[Africanus]

Man, Einstein's "Why Socialism" should be required reading for all college-bound people.

It's sad that college has literally becoming a job training factory and very little else, in the eyes of our culture.

Burn it down please.

I mean, at what point was it not?

Either one went to college because they had excess money, time, or privilege as it was in the early days, or one goes to college for job potential as it has been in the latter section.

If you can afford to go to college for the learning experience, that's fine, but most cannot.

 

[ItIsOkBro]

I wonder why he doesn't refer to the study he used for unemployment when talking about underemployment and pay

(blue means recent college graduate)

 

[ATF487]

I feel like when I read this article I get a different sense of what the job market is like vs. how it's being described here.

They mention how many businesses are looking for certain skills that liberal arts majors tend to teach them, but how many of those would throw out a resume without a business related major on them?

I generally think something needs to be done about the idea of school as a job factory, but given that is the reality today, it makes sense to funnel students/kids into the practical degrees.

 

[trixx]

I'm still reading, but I would wager the top 25% of those respective liberal arts majors is a significantly smaller number than it is for STEM and significantly more competitive, assuming they're academia

Yeah, though STEM is incredibly competitive as well.
Last thing you want to study is studying something that you don't like, it's worse than studying liberal arts. I know a few people switching from majors like Computer Science to things like political science and business after 3/4 years.

Your school experience is way worse when your studying a topic you don't give a crap for or if you're struggling hard with it. That's the only advice I have on this topic...

Also if your parents aren't paying for your school, forget what they have to say. If they're paying for your school they're going to see it as an investment. Because I am paying for my school I am investing in myself and do what I see fit.

Personally I'm graduating with a degreee in Population health and Philosophy. Am i going to get a job in Canada? Probably not, but I don't mind even moving to Ghana eventually and working down there so my degree doesn't necessarily limit me.

You don't have to follow this advice though. The first one I recommend, unless you want to have a shit four years

 

[PdotMichael]

My standard argument if someone isn't sure if he wants to do STEM or something else is that if you pick STEM you can be sure that you can do something STEM related after college/university.

 

[justjustin]

From the article:

A study for the Association of American Colleges and Universities found that 93 percent of employers agreed that a “demonstrated capacity to think critically, communicate clearly, and solve complex problems is more important than [a job candidate’s] undergraduate major.”

It’s worth remembering that at American universities, the original rationale for majors was not to train students for careers. Rather, the idea was that after a period of broad intellectual exploration, a major was supposed to give students the experience of mastering one subject, in the process developing skills such as discipline, persistence, and how to research, analyze, communicate clearly and think logically.

These are good points to take note of. You pick up these skills in any major, during any good college experience.

This falls in line with my parents' attitude. They told me if I wanted a job to go learn a trade. College doesn't necessarily lead to employment, and shouldn't be viewed as job training (since employers don't view it that way, either).

Ironically, I think top-earners tend to be liberal arts majors because they realize their college degrees aren't good enough! They rely on post-graduate studies. I feel like liberal arts undergrads need more education, experience, time, and money for it to "pay off" in the end. They have a much less clear path. That's just the sense I get from my experience and people I know.

 

[trixx]

My standard argument if someone isn't sure if he wants to do STEM or something else is that if you pick STEM you can be sure that you can do something STEM related after college/university.

This is generally true. Studying arts your likely not going to do something directly related even after graduate school. I've spoken to numerous people that are doing odd jobs. I definitely think there's more benefit in studying sciences, but I don't think liberal arts is as bad as people make it out to be.