There’s more than a grain of truth in the old joke that goes something like this:
The engineering graduate asks, “How will it work?”
The physics grad wants to know, “Why does it work?”
And the liberal arts graduate asks, “Do you want fries with that?”
I know you liberal arts majors out there bristle every time you hear a quip like that — but you shouldn’t. Especially after a 2016 survey conducted by BestColleges.com found that the ten US colleges and universities with the best return on investment are:
- SUNY Maritime College
- Colorado School of Mines
- Georgia Tech
- Massachusetts Maritime Academy
- South Dakota School of Mines
- New Jersey Institute of Technology
- Missouri University of Science & Technology
- University of California – Berkeley
- California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
- University of Massachusetts – Lowell
Notice that there are exactly zero pure liberal arts colleges on the list. However, there are eight institutions that specialize in engineering, science and/or technology degrees, including my alma mater, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
The reason for that is simple: Fewer people get technical degrees, which keeps demand for engineers and scientists high, which in turn keeps their salaries high in relation to most other professions.
Obviously, the trick for you folks in college who aren’t interested in pursuing a technical degree — or becoming a lawyer or doctor — is to make sure you don’t get caught spending $100,000 or more on a personal student loan (PSL) for a degree that ends up being a complete waste of money. After all, 1.4 million students use PSLs each year!
Okay, Len. So how do I do that?
Well … consider the following list of 22 real-life college courses:
1. The Joy of Garbage (UC Berkeley)
2. Oprah Winfrey: The Tycoon (University of Illinois)
3. The Beatles (UC Los Angeles)
4. Surfing (The University of Plymouth)
5. Arguing with Judge Judy (UC Berkeley)
6. David Beckham Studies (Staffordshire University)
7. Circus Stunts (Triton College)
8. UFOs In American Society (Temple University)
9. Philosophy and Star Trek (Georgetown University)
10. Invented Languages: Klingon and Beyond (UC Santa Cruz)
11. Stupidity (Occidental College)
12. Bob Dylan and America (Alfred University)
13. How to Watch Television (Montclair State University)
14. Whitewater Skills (West Virginia University)
15. The Art of Walking (Centre College)
16. Animal Cognition (UC Berkeley)
17. Underwater Basket Weaving (Rutgers University)
18. Learning from YouTube (Pitzer College)
19. Cyberporn and Society (SUNY Buffalo)
20. Ghostbusting (Coventry University)
21. The Simpsons and Philosophy (UC Berkeley)
22. The Phallus (Occidental College)
There is a common characteristic among those 22 courses that stands out: none of them require any math skills.
Even more importantly, unless you plan on making a career out of teaching people how to walk properly, speak Klingon, argue with Judge Judy, or identify phallic images from random cloud formations, all of these courses add very little toward making you more competitive in the marketplace.
Think about it. Are there really employers looking for graduates who can juggle five balls in the air, moonlight as a second-rate dog whisperer, or know that the Walrus was Paul?
Of course. But not many.
It’s true; there aren’t many bosses out there pounding on their desks and demanding their high-paid headhunters find them a guy that knows — I mean really, really knows — how to watch the boob tube. But you can bet your bottom dollar that they’re absolutely begging for people who have taken numerous courses in mathematics, engineering, chemistry and physics.
So before you go off and spend $100,000 or more on an expensive college education, you’d be wise to select a degree that requires you to take courses that are always in high demand by employers — if you plan on getting a reasonably quick and decent return on your college investment worthy of an Ivy League portfolio, that is.
And if your college degree of choice requires you to take any of the aforementioned 22 real-life classes, you may want to think about finding yourself a new major. Stat.
Then again, if your dream job is asking customers if they’d like to super-size their value meal — then knock yourself out.
Photo Credit: brosner
I recognize that a lot of your posts are more than a little tongue-in-cheek, so I’ll try not to be that idiot who takes something way too seriously that was meant to be a joke.
But I gotta say, I was pretty shocked to see that “Animal Cognition” is on your list of classes that are so silly they are a sign your degree might be worthless. Did this make the list because you think that animals don’t have any cognition worth studying? Because I’d be surprised if you could find many psychology departments that didn’t offer credit towards a major for a similar class; studying animal cognition is an important way of gaining insight into the human mind. Not only that, but psychology classes actually DO require math skills – you can’t understand or do research in the social sciences without knowing a fair amount about statistics.
If what you’re saying is that social sciences like psychology are also useless on the employment market, then fine – that’s an argument you’re entitled to make. But I think it’s going to take a bit more work than the easy target of humanities bashing…
I completely agree about the Animal Cognition class. I was very surprised to see it on there. We are allowed to do a lot more experimentation on the animal brain than we are on the human brain. Plus, animals are a lot smarter than most people realize. They just can’t voice their thoughts. About half of my class on “Learning and Memory” looked at mice and monkeys.
Anyways, I also found it funny that 3 of the do-not-take classes are from UC-Berkley, which is number 6 on the salary list. They’ve gotta be doing something right in those classes.
I can understand the sentiment though. That you should waste your money on courses where you aren’t learning anything. When you pick out a your program, you need to make sure that you’ll be learning some kind of monetizable skill.
opps, that should be “you shouldn’t waste your money”
I am in this situation right now. I work as a Financial Aid Counselor, and as such, have a hard time justifying completing my Masters Degree in Marketing. Will it help me in my current job, no. Is there any demand for marketing grads, no. So now I am 3 classes into a degree I love, and stuck between completion and the cost.
Everyday I assist students entering into a nursing masters from various backgrounds. It is a shame that we cannot support careers that do not entail math, science, or technology. What are the rest of us suppost to do when we are not inclined towards those academicly?
@ Emmy:
‘Suppost?’..’Academicly?’
A Masters? (Ummm…)
Ha ha-I am a bad speller (also typing on an iTouch). I am at home sick today, so how about some sympathy?
@Laura and Laura J: Uh oh. Let me have it, ladies! Why am I suddenly beginning to feel like I missed out by not taking an Animal Cognition class when I was in college? 😉
@Laura J: I noticed that too when I was writing this piece. I think the main reason UCB ranks so high is they graduate a lot of folks with technical, medical and law degrees.
@Emmy: There is support for careers that do not entail math and sciences. However, the competition for those jobs is much fiercer – which lowers pay and makes jobs tougher to find. There may be far more marketing grads out in the market right now than jobs, but don’t let that discourage you. If you truly love marketing then you have a big advantage over a lot of marketing grads/majors that don’t. That’s because folks who love with they do are typically also among the best in their fields – which should bode well for you, Emmy, over the long haul.
I’m all for supporting mathematics and science, but not everyone wants to be a physicist or engineer. Yes, liberal studies colleges may seem like a waste of money; however did you know that most teaching credential candidates major in liberal studies? I’m sure you’re now thinking, “No wonder our education system is in a state of decline!” Yet, the idea behind these majors entering into teaching is that they are “well-rounded” in many subjects.
So, I agree that students should take the time to think about their earning potential associated with their degree of choice, especially if they are borrowing money they will need to pay back. However, some employers are fascinated with degrees, such as say anthropology, and will hire you on that basis alone. 😉
Who knows, maybe the next working generation will need to know how to speak Klingon.
I have majors is Chemistry and education and minors in computer science and physics. I teach high school. Even though a tight economy makes it tougher to find a new teaching job, I’ve never been unemployed.
My sister, a music major, has never been paid to perform.
Argue the details all you want, but, the main idea of this article is dead on.
School and Universities have no value these days. I spent 5 years on nothing. The “knowledge” I got in the college was useless!
I totally agree with this post. I got a BA in Geography and Environmental studies…and the only thing that saved my butt was that I focused on Geographic Information Systems. THAT was a certificate added on which got me my first job.
I’m now balancing it out with an MBA in Finance hoping that the two will be seen more as ‘diverse background’ rather than ‘lacks any sort of direction’. But, when you’re young you’re fairly stupid. I’ve seen that first hand discussing a potential marine bioligist degree with a friend’s kid. Great, if you don’t live in a landlocked state (‘But I really don’t want to be that far from my parents’ HUH?!). And it wasn’t even 10 years ago that I was that stupid kid myself. 😀
So fun.
Thanks for the great post!
Virginia Tech in the house!!! I can live with being #9 (and in bold no less).
And way below UVa and W&M, of course. But you should be used to that.
I considered going to UVA but I actually enjoy diversity…and a winning football team.
Can’t speak for William & Mary…never heard of it, probably because I was born after 1850!
So you went to a college ranked at 71 instead of a college ranked at 25 lower because you “enjoy diversity”
You just cant make this stuff up.
Actually, “kletus,” these rankings that you speak up can be “made up”.
Did you realize that a significant part of the way rankings by US News and World Report are calculated, has to do with the ranking given to it by its president and provost? And the “reputation” they consider about other schools? There was a big to-do recently when people learned that the president of Clemson University was ranking his school very high in comparison to Ivy League schools. Essentially, when you’re looking at 100 schools spread out over a tier, you’ll roughly get the same kind of education. We are not living in the 1600s when Harvard was substantially better than the little red schoolhouse.
If you go to Swarthmore, you’ll probably get the same education as someone who went to Brown, maybe better depending on specific programs and your and the school’s personality. Surely you realize that people teaching at your #71 school may have degrees from the one you rank as “25 lower”… and vice-versa. People from Georgia Tech end up at Michigan, people from Michigan end up at Vanderbilt, people from Vanderbilt end up at Berkeley.
Speaking as someone who went to a school “merely” ranked as #100 among liberal arts schools, diversity comes in a lot of forms. I certainly got sick of all the people from New England and the Middle Atlantic states asking me if I grew up on a farm, merely because I’m a Midwesterner.
Some people want to go to schools where they will meet people from different places, backgrounds, and countries, and other people choose to be “normal” at Texas A&M.
Some of the best courses I took in college had crazy names: History of Sex and Drugs (history course) and Monsters and Mad Men in Lit and Film (literature course). Best discussions and good arguing skills learn there. Sometimes the “easy” looking courses are the most challenging.
I have a friend from college who majored in Leisure Studies, and I kid you not, it took about 10 years for him to graduate.
I think that one problem is that young people don’t think enough before choosing their major. I have a bachelor’s in history, but am now studying for a second in computer science. I don’t believe that the first bachelor’s was a total waste, though, as I did find the study interesting and learned French and German as well.
In my opinion, the whole “get a degree and you will make money” period is over. Specializing in a career field or becoming an Entreprenuer is what is going to pay off. A general degree with no career focus probably won’t.
I also agree with Little House that not everyone is cut out to be (or would enjoy being) an Engineer or a Scientist. Nothing is worse than working in a field you hate for 40 years, just because it pays well. A lot of Lawyers are figuring this out right now.
I think people like Emmy should go for Marketing if that is their passion, with the understanding that it will be difficult. I have a friend who is a V.P. of Marketing at Skechers and she loves her job. It took her years to get there and she works really hard.
One more piece of advice for Emmy, you don’t need the Masters degree to get started. Get a job in Marketing first. There are some openings for people with a Bachelors degree. A Masters degree with no work experience isn’t so valuable.
I went full-time for an MBA, and can see some years later that many of my former classmates are in more quantitatively oriented jobs now. Additionally, I have directly seen how people with math and science backgrounds can be sought after.
Now, I’m all for balance and well rounded, and believe there is significant value to liberal arts education, though it might not manifest itself in immediate starting salaries.
That said, that value doesn’t extend to classes like underwater basket weaving. It says something about those schools that offer stuff like that. Worse, it says something about the clowns that spend tuition money on such low ROI classes
Underwater Basket Weaving! I always thought that was just a joke going around but now I see it is real! 🙂
I’m of the opinion that no education is wasted, if someone is serious and passionate about it. I only worked for one year in my field (Human Services—I went to a technical college. I worked as a job coach, helping people with disabilities find jobs) after graduation before I quit to be a SAHM. But I still value my education and am glad I went to college.
I agree that those courses sound like jokes. (OK, people, except animal cognition which I know nothing about!) I can’t believe they are legitimate. Why would you need to weave a basket underwater? 🙂
In my state (Nevada), the post-secondary education system has been the primary topic of conversation since as far back as I can remember. Every suggested cut to colleges and universities is met not just with campus protests, but adults who are old enough to know better whining about how we’re shortchanging our children. Because, you know, without a college degree you can’t get a job.
Which is nonsense. Plenty of well-paying jobs don’t. Given the choice between becoming, say, a mechanic or a carpenter with a year of training, then earning money right out of the gate, or incurring 4 years’ worth of enormous debts to earn a degree in women’s studies or sociology, isn’t the recommended solution obvious, at least from a financial perspective?
@LittleHouse: Well-rounded is definitely good. I guess I just wonder how much value one really gets from paying big money to a university to take a seemingly self-evident subject like, say, The Art of Walking or How to Watch Television. I’m not certain how much that really adds in the well-rounded department. 🙂
@Christa: We’ve all been there. I’ll take wisdom over youth any day of the week.
@Jenna: Okay. I’ll trade you Advanced Linear Algebra for the History of Sex and Drugs. 😉
@Pineview: LOL! That just made my day!
@Bret: “In my opinion, the whole get a degree and you will make money period is over.” Agreed! I think the colleges have brought it upon themselves too. The costs are so ridiculous now that they have made it quite obvious that the return on investment just isn’t worth it for many many majors – at least for the higher priced universities.
@TheWiseSquirrel: It also is an indictment against the college system itself. I say offering up some of those classes is tantamount to a con artist selling a counterfeit painting as the genuine valuable article.
@Carrie: I know. And I agree with you that no education is wasted. It’s just that some educations are more cost effective than others. And some aren’t cost effective at all.
@Greg: They have the same protests over here in California, Greg. And I agree with you about the value of being a mechanic or carpenter. So many kids have been told that college is the only way to “make it,” which is pure hog wash. I would say three out of five kids in college today really would be much better off if they never went to college.
That’s a pretty keen observation. I know plenty of people working in the technical field, without a degree, previously including myself. The field is easy to get into, because technology is readily available, but I see why degrees in the field are so important. With all the uneducated techies out there, just plugging along, finding one with a degree is the holy grail.
Len, you are one sharp cookie.
Excellent article! I will save this one for my kids when they get old enough to understand it.
OK Len, you’ll probably shoot me after this comment and I don’t totally believe it myself, so bear with me. In my first MS degree in Counseling and Personnel Services we learned that historically, college is designed to offer a broad liberal arts education to instruct in critical thinking, problem solving, and a breadth of knowledge. I think it’s a good premise.
Unfortunatelly, in today’s economy, most can’t afford that luxury.
Barb: I think we are pretty much in agreement. I’m not knocking lib arts degrees, per se. My main point is that in most cases, people expecting to maximize their monetary ROI from their college education would be better off focusing on a technology degree – as opposed to a lib arts degree.
Barb, You’re correct, 200 yrs ago, the landed aristocracy and rich folks sent their kids to college to study Greek and Latin, the classics, history, etc. They were then qualified to win debates in parliament and live a very elegant and informed life. The technology of the time could be managed by craftsmen who learned on the job, and was advanced slowly by a few brilliant self-taught fellows.
As the industrial revolution progressed, a much larger number of more highly trained people was required. West Point and Annapolis were founded to supply technically trained officers for the Army and Navy and schools like #14 above were founded (1861) to fulfill this need. The Morrill acts at about the same time led to the proliferation of colleges providing technical education. The GI bill after WWII increased the availability of college and technical education to a much larger segment of the population. These students also learn critical thinking and problem solving along with their practical skills.
Now if you come from a rich or landed family, you can still follow the old model of liberal education and end up rich and famous (like the Kennedys). If you are like most of us, learning practical skills that deliver value that employers are willing to pay for or that enable an entrepreneur to provide useful products and services will generally deliver more economic value. If you are going the liberal arts route, you need to have a plan of how it will translate to value in the eyes of employers or customers or be prepared to accept probable low earning power.
Notwithstanding all this, studying science and engineering tends to leave no spare time for anything else, and the lack of any liberal education (history, arts, languages, geography, political science, literature etc.) means you miss out on some elements of the elegant and informed life. This is a significant loss. It’s important to fill this gap.
Based on one person’s experience, I would say that it is easier to work hard and focus on the scientific and technical fundamentals in college and fill in the liberal arts later in life than the other way around. Times change, your mileage may vary.
@Bret – Nothing is worse than working in a field you hate for 40 years, just because it pays well.
I disagree. Living in your car with your diploma that you are passionate about is much worse, in my opinion, than putting in 40 hr/wk in a job that you hate. Conversely, with a job that pays well, you make enough money to enjoy yourself off-the-clock.
Also, there’s no guarantee you won’t hate the job you envisioned having when you were loving the education. Just because you loved learning a topic in school doesn’t mean you’ll enjoy the real world job attached to that topic. So a job in marketing is rarely anything like majoring in marketing in it’s day to day tasks.
It’s hard to love a job that doesn’t pay enough to give you financial freedom. I know I would become bitter and end up hating a job that afforded me little in the way of financial security no matter how much I may have love the job in the beginning.
But that’s just my philosophy. This coming from an engineer who fully enjoys her time away from work because I am compensated enough to pursue my passions on my own time. I think our forefathers called this sacrifice (or was it just “work”?) 😛
Wizardess,
I’m no stranger to sacrifice or hard work. I have been doing it for 30 years straight. Although my IT job is demanding, I love the work that I do. And, since I spend a lot of time working, it’s important to me that I enjoy it. I don’t see my time off-the-clock as proper compensation for 40 years of drudgery. But, that’s just my philosophy. To each his own.
Also, I highly doubt someone with a serious passion for a field like Marketing will be living in their car or eating ramen. There is plenty of opportunity for someone who is driven to succeed.
“Yep. There are exactly zero liberal arts colleges on the list.” – Len
According to the William and Mary website: “We’re famous for our rigorous liberal arts curriculum and our dedicated, engaged professors.” (http://www.wm.edu/about/wmataglance/index.php)
Touche! Make that exactly ONE college. 😉
Hey Len,
I would classify all those schools such as UVA, BYU, etc. as liberals arts college. I’m actual shocked that UVA is there since it is so well know as a party school. I don’t think any of my friends from there were sober more than 2 days a week when they attended.
I do enjoy the list of classes. I wonder how much of it is titling to get the kids into the class, classic bait and switch.
I decided to take the Evil and Decadence class when I was at MIT because of the title. Being young and stupid, I didn’t really read the details. I thought, yippee, a break between science and math. It was one of the hardest course I ever took.
We started the class with 250 students and less than 25 remained at the end because it was so hard and intensive. It was a literature class and we had to read a book a week, analyze it, write an essay and find real life example of the aberrant behavior but we have to think outside of the box. We also had to debate points of view.
Did you ever think that the Pilgrims were decadent?
The finals was taking the theme from one book and illustrated it in real life by using the rest of your classes. i.e. if you have chemistry, you need to utilize that field.
That is still one of my favorite classes and taught me a great deal that I use today in real life: analysis, philosophy, ethics, assumptions, collaboration and many other social skills.
Liberal Arts Colleges don’t really do a lot for you these days. I mean sure they give you a better studying environment but in all reality its not what school you went to its what you do at school and what career choice you take. Doing something you love is one of the most important things for both college and work.
I agree w/your conclusion. However, I happen to have an engineering degree from Georgia Tech AND an MBA (for U or Iowa), but I’m still underemployeed. I think education in a hard science helps. However, I wouldn’t bank on it, especially if you are trying to convenience potential employers in a soft science (in my case, marketing) that having analytical skills is advantageous.
Glad I came across this as I am in the process of visiting college with my oldest son.
He currently attends a small high school, so the size of a typical liberal arts school is appealing to him. However, the price is not appealing to me at all. We have looked at a variety of schools and one problem I found with the smaller, liberal arts schools is that they don’t have as many offerings as major universities do. Therefore, if you decide to change majors,you may be somewhat limited. He is leaning toward University of Michigan now, so I was quite glad to see them on your list.
@Kim: Looks like you should have taken Oprah Winfrey: The Tycoon instead. Er, assuming MIT borrowed the curriculum from U of I. 😉
@Chanda: An science-based education is no guarantee of steady employment, to be sure. What it does guarantee is that you will have many more options in the job market than, say, a history or philosophy major.
This post is too funny. I think part of the problem is that parents have steered the conversation away from ROI and towards personal fulfillment.
I think it’s okay to go after a career that is personally fulfilling. However, if “Underwater Basket Weaving” is what fulfills you and only two people on earth have been able to make a real career out of it, you have to label that as a hobby and find another thing that fulfills you and pays the bills. I guess there is another option: learn how to live on an underwater basket weavers earnings. However to get back to the original point, that doesn’t produce a good ROI on education dollars.
I don’t think we have to choose between enjoying our work and making a good living. I believe a person who is creative can find a way to make a good ROI on education AND find a career that is fulfilling.
I took a few “free” one-credit classes in college. These included weight lifting, yoga and raquetball (that’s all I can remember – but yes, they were free and one credit). I did it to cut out one elective from my senior year. I’m happy with the choice but admit that I don’t “lead” with those classes when putting a resume together 🙂
It’s really amazing how valuable “math” is in the marketplace. I work in NYC and it seems everyone from hedge funds to law firms drool over math-related majors for their “way of thinking and analysis.” Boy I wish I knew that before I went to college. I won’t complain, but I have a particular love for math and it would certainly be valuable to have a math-related degree on my resume.
Most a smartly written post and reader comments that you have here. I would like to point out that other sites certainly propose a different angle, especially in terms of natural health. Has anyone here run across good related ideas on the Web, and would you give me some direction?
What a brightly written comment! I look forward to reading more from you on this very helpful site.
@Brains: Solar flares don’t discriminate when it comes to buying Chex. In September grasshoppers remind us why zephyrs avoid talking politics on glass-bottomed boats. No.
The information you give is without peer. Me and all my friends agree. Will visit back here often.
I agree with most of this, but as a Rutgers student can i please clarify that Underwater Basket Weaving is not an academic for-credit course? It is a one day program offered through recreational services.
Hey, if I didn’t need financial security, I would totally pursue a ghost busting degree. That sounds like a ton of fun – either ghosts are real and you learn how to suck them up or ghosts are fake and you get to work with eccentric people all day – either option actually sounds fun to me. Sadly, I rather not live on Ramen again…
The point is, that there is really much job for both technical postgraduates and humanists. But employers need real specialists, but not the students that have been doing nothing throughouttheir studies. I’m getting a humanists education and I see, that most of my mates are not ready for doing the job they are studying to do. The people are just getting education for the fact of getting it, bit not for future working in the sphere. This is the problem.
I totally agree with author, but guess what colleges are charging over $100K to graduate students with these degrees. They should be embarrased to be offering such usless degrees. Colleges should think long term like–will this student make enough money to contribute to our endowment.
In any event I received a better education for only $49.95. Its one of the best business models around and teaches people how to start making a six figure income with proven business models and concepts that are designed by successful business entrepreneurs.
It saved my home and it has changed my financial future. I’ll bet that I make more now per year than any student with a business or liberal arts degree.
HaHa……I found this article hilarious because for a Phy Ed credit in college I took Walking/Running and got a C!!!!!!!!
You sound like my son; he got a C in PE too. I mean, you really have to work NOT to get an A in Phys Ed.
Len, I think it’s too bad you lumped ALL of those courses together, arguing that they make you less competitive. You had some good points there, but they got lost among a slick dismissal of courses with funny names.
With the exception of ghostbusting, none of these classes were degrees.*
UFOs in American Society? Yes, the link showed a plethora of courses on American sociology and culture – which would be useful not only for liberal arts grads but also for people who want to work in business or the State Department. You can be a regular math whiz, but if you don’t understand how your customer thinks and acts, that will have just as big an impact on the bottom line.
The Whitewater Skills class isn’t very stupid if you consider HOW many businesses are started in West Virginia, run by people who take tourists out on the rivers… and seriously, it’s clearly listed as an elective running under 2 weeks.
“How to Watch Television” is an analysis course for a program in TV, film and communications. I have a similar degree and so do three of my colleagues. Do classes make people like us competitive? Yes – absolutely. Anyone who wants to work in advertising, public relations, the entertainment industry, or journalism would benefit from such courses. They are not gut courses. Those fields, though are all the type you described as being more competitive, but it’s not about math – though it includes plenty of math-averse people. It’s as much about glamour.
Second, and I really think you need to approach this in a future post – having kids take a purely consumerist approach to their career is a bad, bad idea. Showing them that science and math are important skills, as important as English – yes, absolutely! Of course, many science and math students really need help learning to write decent English. My engineer husband is valued because, unlike many others in his field, he can write clearly.
Kids and their parents wanting a rock-solid ROI from their education are, I am sorry to say, deluded much of the time.
When I was an undergrad, my father pushed me to get a degree in computer science, and to become a programmer. I had a lot of experience for a little girl nerd by then. Long story short, I ended up studying film and computer science, but I didn’t become a programmer. And it was a good thing, too – because as I got to know professional programmers – one of my friends was one of the first people hired at AOL and continues now at Microsoft – I realized how much age discrimination exists, and how American workers are frequently thrown over so companies can hire cheap H1-B visa holders. They absolutely love young programmers, usually guys, who will work insane hours for quite a bit of pay. But then the guys turn 35 and they’re married, they have children, they want to have a life – and that’s when the other shoe drops. In fact, Len, many of the in-demand degrees you talk about are in the same boat.
No one really knows what the future brings. The trick is that you study something you enjoy and that you’re good at, and that has transferable skills.
Over the years I’ve seen people rush into certain fields because they are so certain that they will be hired – nursing’s a good one. Yes, there’s a nursing shortage in some markets – but in some areas of the country, nurses have been laid off. And many, many people I know from telecommunications (remember when that was hot?) and IT have had bad years.
Students and their parents are better off if they find a way to study something that has a better occupational outlook, which they hopefully love to do, but should at least like doing. If they like accounting, and they love poetry, it’s not hard to get a minor in poetry. Then, maybe they can start out doing the books for a small literary magazine part-time, while working a decent job that earns them money. They could end up going into arts management, or they might become an accountant at a top firm who support the arts with donations. Maybe they make enough money to publish their own poetry chapbooks or take a month off to go write haiku in Japan. The trick is to have a kid be well-rounded enough to have choices and flexibility.
What a lot of hard-nosed dads and moms don’t realize is that, when they absolutely forbid the kid from doing anything they think is “useless”, the kid is either going to try and make them happy, and then resent them, or they’re going to rebel. Far better to be even-handed. What is the harm of taking a class on Star Trek and philosophy, if they’re studying nuclear physics?
*[I should also note that a classmate of mine did pursue a liberal arts degree with a special emphasis in parapsychology, and went to work – yes – ghostbusting. She and her employer were featured in an episode of “Unsolved Mysteries”. It would be a stupid choice for most people, but she made it work.]
Thanks for your comments, Sib.
“What is the harm of taking a class on Star Trek and philosophy, if theyre studying nuclear physics?”
None. The main point of this piece was merely that technical degrees on average provide a better ROI on college investment than non-technical degrees. That is undeniable. Exceptions to the rule will always exist.
Moving along, nothing to see here.
Employers do want well rounded candidates. I know where I work they prefer liberal arts schools over technical schools as those graduates are on average better at writing, critical thinking, etc. Yes, just knowing how to argue with the great Judge Judy might not be a worthwhile skill, but knowing how to argue and debate and prove your points well IS an important skill that successful people should know and doing it in the context of Judge Judy is much more engaging and fun for students.
Even Invented Languages: Klingon and Beyond is a linguistics class which could be of great use to computer science people who may want to work on building new software languages and AI. You are failing to look outside the box at what these classes can teach you.
If all you want is ROI then go to a cheap technical, state, or community college. They will teach you a specific skill and give you a degree so you can get a job and go to work every day. But if you want to invent new things, see new sights, change the world then I think those classes do help with that.
Your argument that technical or STEM fields offer a better rate of return on their investment assumes we’re measuring that investment in a strictly monetarily sense. There are other reasons students attend college and other ways to measure success; not everyone is out to learn one trade or skill and do that for the rest of their lives. Most people will change jobs over the course of their lifetime, and a liberal arts education, where students learn critical thinking and writing skills, an appreciation for other points of view, and an understanding of more than one field of study, are well-poised to handle that challenge.
However, if you are completely focused on looking at only the monetary value of an education, look at the top majors coming out of many liberal arts schools – biology, chemistry, computer science – the lucrative STEM fields of which you speak. These students go on to careers in engineering, medicine, scientific research and discovery, and a host of other math/science related areas. Except the students coming out of a liberal arts education are also in better positions to be able to understand and do more than the technical training they received.
And if your measure of an institution’s worth revolves around one or two random classes the school happens to also teach, you should talk to MIT. I hear their American Pro Wrestling class is very popular.
Len as the parent of a college grad who also has two in college I partly agree but mostly disagree. My oldest was an art major at USC (full disclosure she got a full tuition academic ride) and 2 years after graduation works in web design and web publishing for the USC Institute for Creative Technologies. She earns enough to support herself in LA and save some money to boot (not counting funding her 403b). Our other daughter will graduate in June from Northwestern in Religion and Anthropology (with our blessing and some generous help from Northwestern) with honors. Given her track record of getting great internships and the doors a Northwestern degree can open I don’t worry for a second about her ability to get a job (if she goes that route vs. law school). Our son will likely major in Communications at Northern IL (he’s a soph) and given his ability to connect with people and his networking skills I know he will not only get a job but will be quite successful at whatever he tries. I agree with the concept of ROI for a given degree/school, but I disagree with the almost trade school mentality many place on picking a major in college (not a knock on trade schools).
Do you really think that a degree with surfing in the title is just about wave riding? If you read the student stories on the left of this page and read the course prospectus, you will see a very vocationally oriented degree that has been going since 1999.
http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page=35823
No, I do not work for them and my own area is computers.
i agree to disagree completely . all these alike article and mentalities are driven by greed and the need to amass money and for self gratification and material gluttony. i would never want to live in a world that will not last if only math science and man made food are its configuration. the world will only survice and perpetuate when good people help others in balancing things out. human rights, equity justice for all . not religion but spiritual guidance to do the right things and not what reaps big profits. great writers are needed and wise people not intelligent who cracks and punch in numbers like automatons innately empty and shallow– most scientists are . i would rather be fully rational and aware of every spirit around me and imbue positive things for a good cause for the common heritage of human instead than working with machines only. so what is written is a fraction of a virtual fake world and is not sustainable . the need for good and just people who are completely ignorant about machines but awake about others’ health and being is teh whole thing.. i hate stupid and material glutonous people
OK, but the bottom line is still this: You don’t need an overpriced university degree in underwater basket weaving to achieve the utopia you’re looking for.
As for your assertion that scientists are shallow, I think you’ve got it backwards. That label more appropriately applies those who think the world will be a better place if only everybody would get together, hold hands, sing Cumbaya, and willingly advance the human condition without monetary incentives — especially when there are so many others who are more than willing to take advantage of people like you, and simply sit back and enjoy the fruit of those who do work hard. You’ve painted a picture of a very nice dream, but it’s woefully naive; human nature simply doesn’t work that way.
When you are out of school (college) for 5-10 years, no cares where you went to school or even what you studied! By that time you are either in a good career or not. It is up to the individual to do something with your education. It may be easier for engineers, accountants and computer scientists, but unless they move up into management they will top out. The CEOs of companies come from all disciplines, but mostly from marketing and sales. That area of companies do not require a technical degree.
Part of the responsibility should be on the parents — especially if they’re kicking anything in for this degree.
Better yet: Plan earlier to “test out” of one or even two years by taking CLEP exams.
I seriously love your blog, Len. Cheers!
Thank you, Bonnie. Cheers!
FWIW, since I went there the course at Georgetown you used sounded familiar; the course Philosophy and Startrek is an option for your required 2nd course in Philosophy for general education. I’m sure a lot of science majors take it as it kind of touches on philosophical/ethical questions that may occur in their careers. And at 700 pages the text for the class is nothing to sneeze at.
You have to admit, getting a degree in Ghostbusting would be pretty bad-ass.
I don’t encourage people to take too much loans in the name of getting a degree. It is not easy paying back debts
Thanks for the article, Len. Love your website!
Thanks, Jason!