Why don’t top schools have business majors

[Anonymous]

I feel I can offer some perspective on this. I am a graduate of Ivy league undergrad and attended Ivy League business school. My son is attending a top 30 university that has an undergraduate business school. I am encouraging him to double major in business.

I get the idea that a business major is kind of anti-intellectual but the overlap with economics is quite high (all the serious prerequisites). There are many business-related classes within economic departments, like accounting and financial theory.

I understand the business classes at his school are quite challenging. The job placement of the program is impressive. It's a very competitive program that attracts high achievers and high academic performers.

The less professional Ivy league schools do not have undergraduate business programs but many unquestionably elite schools do. It is ridiculous to sneer at them.

[Anonymous]

Because business is not an intellectual/academic major

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach at a top-30 university that recently introduced a business major. Basically the entire faculty outside that major is embarrassed by the whole thing. The business major kids, for the most part, have no intellectual drive, depth, or curiosity, and the whole program operates on a whole raft of assumptions that aren't called into question for a second, because questioning at a deeper level simply isn't demanded or desired. That's why--if we looked at charts of income, achievement, happiness, etc. 10 years down the road--those majors would be near the bottom. They're missing out on the fundamental skill set, and critical/inquisitive frame of mind, that is ideally at the root of undergraduate education. Dunk on this position all you want, but I've seen enough students and grads to stand by it 100%.

Your post is trapped by the inconsistency. Your school just introduced a business major and yet you already have data on the 10 year outcome? And can tie it to such subjective factors as happiness? Something tells me you made this up as it's not backed by anything reputable I can find in a quick 30 second google.

There is nothing complicated about business degrees. Plenty of students want a preprofessional degree to help get the first rung corporate analyst job that will allow them to enter the ranks of the UMC. The growing perception that so much of the old humanities and liberal arts fields are now little more than mumbo jumbo woke revisionist identity politics confirms to these kids that college is little more than getting a respectable degree, four years of learning how to become an adult, and getting that first real job with a serious employer. A business degree ticks the boxes neatly.

I'm 20 years out of college and went to a fancy Ivy. Will say many of my old HS classmates who went to flagships or lesser private colleges and majored in some kind of business degree have done much better than quite a few of the humanities majors at LACs or Ivies. Including yours truly. I've done well but I've also learned that the snobbery of academia and degrees is highly misplaced and a disservice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach at a top-30 university that recently introduced a business major. Basically the entire faculty outside that major is embarrassed by the whole thing. The business major kids, for the most part, have no intellectual drive, depth, or curiosity, and the whole program operates on a whole raft of assumptions that aren't called into question for a second, because questioning at a deeper level simply isn't demanded or desired. That's why--if we looked at charts of income, achievement, happiness, etc. 10 years down the road--those majors would be near the bottom. They're missing out on the fundamental skill set, and critical/inquisitive frame of mind, that is ideally at the root of undergraduate education. Dunk on this position all you want, but I've seen enough students and grads to stand by it 100%.

Your post is trapped by the inconsistency. Your school just introduced a business major and yet you already have data on the 10 year outcome? And can tie it to such subjective factors as happiness? Something tells me you made this up as it's not backed by anything reputable I can find in a quick 30 second google.

There is nothing complicated about business degrees. Plenty of students want a preprofessional degree to help get the first rung corporate analyst job that will allow them to enter the ranks of the UMC. The growing perception that so much of the old humanities and liberal arts fields are now little more than mumbo jumbo woke revisionist identity politics confirms to these kids that college is little more than getting a respectable degree, four years of learning how to become an adult, and getting that first real job with a serious employer. A business degree ticks the boxes neatly.

I'm 20 years out of college and went to a fancy Ivy. Will say many of my old HS classmates who went to flagships or lesser private colleges and majored in some kind of business degree have done much better than quite a few of the humanities majors at LACs or Ivies. Including yours truly. I've done well but I've also learned that the snobbery of academia and degrees is highly misplaced and a disservice.

+100 My small Non-DMV private pushed the Ivies, SLAC’s and other selective schools several decades ago. The top students were almost never encouraged to look seriously at our state flagship. The students who went to the state flagship and other “lesser” colleges are doing just as well, maybe even better than the ones who went to the Ivies and SLAC’s . Nothing wrong with going to a regional state school and getting a degree in accounting, business administration, nursing, etc. Sometimes the students at those schools and in those majors are more grounded and have a stronger sense of purpose. They’re there for an education and to be job-ready.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historically OP, employers desired liberal arts majors who could think and write. I view are hundreds of years old and wanted students to focus on thinking.The WSJ did a good story on this that you can google. Now, of course, with college costs so high a lot of parents + students want immediate job prep...so they want a more trade school type approach to studying. BTW, my kid was an English major at HYP and was a self made millionaire by 30. Did internships in the summer on Wall Street thanks to HYP Alumni connections.

Harvard English - $64,155
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=2301&fos_credential=3

Boston College Finance - $135.373
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school?164924-Boston-College&fos_code=5208&fos_credential=3

Self-selection is a huge factor here.

I think it’s safe to assume that English majors at T10 schools are not prioritizing their starting salary.

These kids are either playing a longer game (law school) or choosing a different path entirely (lower income jobs/internships/entry positions in publishing/non-profits etc.) likely supplemented by family money.

Strivers are concerned about immediate ROI of their kids’ college education and major. The very wealthy (including beneficiaries of generational wealth) are not.

This isn’t really proven out by the data.

The wealthiest Harvard students (admittedly not differentiating between a billionaire’s kid vs a mere millionaire) pursue the highest paying careers by a wide margin over all other income demographics. Nearly 35% from that cohort.

The poorest kids are equally likely to pursue academia or highest paying jobs at 19% each.

Sure, but how many Harvard/Princeton English majors are disappointed with their salaries 10 years after college?

My point is that these are intentional choices that are not made with “maximizing salary” as the goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historically OP, employers desired liberal arts majors who could think and write. I view are hundreds of years old and wanted students to focus on thinking.The WSJ did a good story on this that you can google. Now, of course, with college costs so high a lot of parents + students want immediate job prep...so they want a more trade school type approach to studying. BTW, my kid was an English major at HYP and was a self made millionaire by 30. Did internships in the summer on Wall Street thanks to HYP Alumni connections.

Harvard English - $64,155
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=2301&fos_credential=3

Boston College Finance - $135.373
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school?164924-Boston-College&fos_code=5208&fos_credential=3

Self-selection is a huge factor here.

I think it’s safe to assume that English majors at T10 schools are not prioritizing their starting salary.

These kids are either playing a longer game (law school) or choosing a different path entirely (lower income jobs/internships/entry positions in publishing/non-profits etc.) likely supplemented by family money.

Strivers are concerned about immediate ROI of their kids’ college education and major. The very wealthy (including beneficiaries of generational wealth) are not.

This isn’t really proven out by the data.

The wealthiest Harvard students (admittedly not differentiating between a billionaire’s kid vs a mere millionaire) pursue the highest paying careers by a wide margin over all other income demographics. Nearly 35% from that cohort.

The poorest kids are equally likely to pursue academia or highest paying jobs at 19% each.

Sure, but how many Harvard/Princeton English majors are disappointed with their salaries 10 years after college?

My point is that these are intentional choices that are not made with “maximizing salary” as the goal.

I don’t understand the point. PP said strivers are concerned about immediate ROI while wealthy or not.

I don’t know who the “strivers” are…but just saying the wealthiest Harvard kids are the ones that pursue the highest paying jobs the most…not the poorest kids (who I would think would be the strivers). The poorest kids are also fine pursing low paying pathways even though there is no family money.

Now…maybe it makes sense because most wealthy people say striver = ambition. The word for some reason is completely abused on DCUM. The absolute wealthiest people in the country are on record saying they need to instill a striver mentality in their kids because they worry they won’t follow in their own striver footsteps and just count on a trust fund.

[Anonymous]

The top undergraduate “business” schools (Penn’s Wharton, MiT sloan) do not have the same middling business degree (BBA) as lesser schools, instead they have a Bachelor of Science in Economics or equivalent. That and the rigorous coursework is why these schools are respected highly for undergrad business-related majors. The curriculum is very similar to a BS in Econ at other ivies or Stanford. There is a reason these schools are top targets.
A “business” BBA degree is not well respected because it is not rigorous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The top undergraduate “business” schools (Penn’s Wharton, MiT sloan) do not have the same middling business degree (BBA) as lesser schools, instead they have a Bachelor of Science in Economics or equivalent. That and the rigorous coursework is why these schools are respected highly for undergrad business-related majors. The curriculum is very similar to a BS in Econ at other ivies or Stanford. There is a reason these schools are top targets.
A “business” BBA degree is not well respected because it is not rigorous

If schools have business programs, it's almost always harder to get in, more prestigious, and produce better outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because business is not an intellectual/academic major

Granny, it's not 1970s anymore.
Your time is gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The top undergraduate “business” schools (Penn’s Wharton, MiT sloan) do not have the same middling business degree (BBA) as lesser schools, instead they have a Bachelor of Science in Economics or equivalent. That and the rigorous coursework is why these schools are respected highly for undergrad business-related majors. The curriculum is very similar to a BS in Econ at other ivies or Stanford. There is a reason these schools are top targets.
A “business” BBA degree is not well respected because it is not rigorous

The curriculum is not the same as an actual economics degree. My kid is at Wharton and your only requirement is Micro and Macro. You don’t have to take another economics class ever if you don’t want.

An economics major will of course take far more theoretical classes than a Wharton finance concentration. The finance classes can be difficult and somewhat theoretical (company valuation especially since the Internet boom has become more art than science), but it is very different than even a Penn Econ major.

There are many top schools where you receive a BBA that are functionally equivalent to a Wharton BSE. There are of course many schools that other a Business Administratiom major which are worthless.

[Anonymous]

I’m curious as to why Wharton is a BS in Econ with the minimum Econ requirements being Econ one and two? At most schools this would barely get you the BA in Econ.

Anyway, what about schools like UTexas, Ross, or ND that offer BBA….are these not considered prestigious, specifically for business, not talking about other majors.

[Anonymous]

At non-elite schools, it’s a major for non intellectually curious kids that want to party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At non-elite schools, it’s a major for non intellectually curious kids that want to party.

Oh please. From Penn State to Syracuse to KU to ASU and LSU - the ENTIRETY of those schools are kids who want to party. Regardless of major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious as to why Wharton is a BS in Econ with the minimum Econ requirements being Econ one and two? At most schools this would barely get you the BA in Econ.

Anyway, what about schools like UTexas, Ross, or ND that offer BBA….are these not considered prestigious, specifically for business, not talking about other majors.

McKinsey would say yes, they are prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The top undergraduate “business” schools (Penn’s Wharton, MiT sloan) do not have the same middling business degree (BBA) as lesser schools, instead they have a Bachelor of Science in Economics or equivalent. That and the rigorous coursework is why these schools are respected highly for undergrad business-related majors. The curriculum is very similar to a BS in Econ at other ivies or Stanford. There is a reason these schools are top targets.
A “business” BBA degree is not well respected because it is not rigorous

I’m pretty sure Notre Dame Mendoza Bschool confers a BBA….. it’s a top 10 program so, you’re wrong.