Reply to Does the college matter?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Does the college matter?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]This is just outright misleading. Corporate CEOs' frequently say they have well paying jobs available in their companies but there are not sufficient applicants with the right skill sets and so they end up having to look overseas. A major in the humanities is not a death sentence but it does not offer one the opportunities for career growth and compensation that other majors do. It is the reality of today's job market.

BTW, I went to an liberal arts school for my undergrad but it was a different era.[/quote]

I have graduated in the past 5 years and watched a number of peers navigate the current job market from a range of majors.  I have also looked at the statistics in terms of employment and salary.  I am not sure what major, aside from engineering offers "career growth and compensation" that is guaranteed.  And even though my engineering friends are better compensated once they get a job, getting a job can be hell, especially in a specialized field like aerospace engineering (I had a friend nonstop apply for over a year before he got a position).  I have also seen English majors work writing reports for hedge funds making 70K off the bat (especially if they are networked and have good grades), and people walk into management consulting with any range of majors.  As a lab technician--which is all you can get with a B.S. in molecular biology, biochemistry, or chemistry that is directly related to the job--you make maybe 30K in an academic setting, 45-50K in an industrial setting with zero prospects of career growth.  You need a PhD to get further, and even the job market for PhDs is rough right now and can get you into a area of eternal postdoc (the academic job market is nuts, and the industrial job market is hard to break into as well) where you are stuck making 40K indefinitely after a decade of higher education.

Mathematics majors, if they are good at it often have options.  There is always a need for actuarial work.  But if you don't have an aptitude for it, then you're not going to pass the exams you need to pass to do that sort of work.  People who work in IT, software engineering, and other areas in tech also are well compensated and have career growth, although especially in silicon valley, the environment is brutal, and if you are a shitty programmer, you're not going to do well there.

A lot of humanities types go to law school, or get certified to teach.  I have also seen people do editorial work, work at consulting firms, go into journalism, do marketing work, and work at non-profits.  Obviously there is a range of compensation in these areas.  Law school is a gamble, but the super driven get into Big Law or a federal clerkship or get a scholarship and work for a regional firm (and most of the people I know who go to law school go to a top 10, mostly Harvard, Yale, and Chicago, and or make smart decisions about where they want to practice regionally and go to a school with a strong regional reputation).

What I haven't seen, despite concerns on this board, is that driven humanities kids don't do fine at the end of the day.  I also see lazy science kids floundering.  And when I look at the range of compensation and the unemployment rate, there is a slight difference, but not nearly as stark as everyone has led me to believe my whole life.  I am a science major, and I think majoring in science is great if someone has the aptitude.  But not everyone has the aptitude, and not everyone is cut out to go into science or medicine.

[b]And I think a lot of the corporate CEOs saying they have to look overseas comes from cheapness on their part.  They can pay foreigners less, and threaten their employment status with a visa. [/b] There is a glut of PhDs in the sciences right now, and most of the issue here comes from a lack of initiative to train entry level employees coming from CEOs.  Nearly every job requires three years of experience, and it becomes a catch 22 in highly technical fields.[/quote]

This

You are wrong!

I work in high tech and there is a dearth of qualified candidates so this is not something made up by corporate CEOs as a rationalization to obtain cheap labor. When we need someone with the right background, our first and preferred option is to hire someone locally but if we cannot find the right people we sub-contract the work usually to companies that hire people from abroad.

We also do hire people who are out of college and provide them the training and experience but it is difficult to find the right candidates and companies compete for the best individuals. If it is a choice between a mediocre candidate and outsourcing the work, most companies do the latter and it has less to do with the cost and more to do with getting the job done.

This is the reality of what is happening and to think that it is all about the bottom line when it comes to hiring people with the right technical skills is delusional.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics