Anonymous wrote:However, I do NOT want to see universities eliminating humanities departments. But I don’t think that producing millions of young adults with bachelor’s degrees in humanities each year is beneficial to the society either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “student loan crisis” is all from professional, tuition-based grad school programs.

"students with law degrees are most likely to fall into delinquency with 54.4% being delinquent at least once."

https://wordsrated.com/student-loan-default-and-delinquency-statistics/#:~:text=Student%20loan%20default%20rates%20by%20degree%20type&text=However%2C%20students%20with%20law%20degrees,being%20delinquent%20at%20least%20once.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Society devalues the humanities. That's why our society is in such a sad state.

Wrong. The society of today is not devaluing humanities. Universities’ humanities departments have devalued humanities degrees in the last few decades. In the good old days when few people went to college and fewer studied humanities, those with humanities degrees were the few, the elite of the society. Most of them came from noble families. They didn’t need to get “jobs” to make a living. Then starting in the 1980’s the society was sold the idea that EVERY high school graduate should go to college. Or at least most of them. It was easy money for universities. No labs were needed (unlike science and engineering), and a history class can be held in a big lecture hall of 500 people. Therefore, the society has not devalued humanities, but universities have definitely devalued humanities degrees.

Er, Hello, the universities don’t exactly operate in a vacuum. They mirror what society wants

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Society devalues the humanities. That's why our society is in such a sad state.

Wrong. The society of today is not devaluing humanities. Universities’ humanities departments have devalued humanities degrees in the last few decades. In the good old days when few people went to college and fewer studied humanities, those with humanities degrees were the few, the elite of the society. Most of them came from noble families. They didn’t need to get “jobs” to make a living. Then starting in the 1980’s the society was sold the idea that EVERY high school graduate should go to college. Or at least most of them. It was easy money for universities. No labs were needed (unlike science and engineering), and a history class can be held in a big lecture hall of 500 people. Therefore, the society has not devalued humanities, but universities have definitely devalued humanities degrees.

Anonymous wrote:The “student loan crisis” is all from professional, tuition-based grad school programs.

Anonymous wrote:Society devalues the humanities. That's why our society is in such a sad state.

Anonymous wrote:Society devalues the humanities. That's why our society is in such a sad state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Society devalues the humanities. That's why our society is in such a sad state.

yea, that's the reason.

Anonymous wrote:Society devalues the humanities. That's why our society is in such a sad state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m married to a Humanities major from a top 10 university. He went into software consulting started @$39k and was making $300k when he went independent 5 years later and makes around $550k. Just a BA.

It's always hilarious when someone trots out a predictable, stupid anecdote like this, as if this experience, even if actually true, is in any way typical of people who have a humanities BA.

PP specified T10. If you go to a T10, it matters less what you major in. If you go to a directional state school, you either need a useful major, family connections, or a lot of luck. A kid at Harvard can major in history, sociology, or anything else they choose to and still expect to end up with a great career. A kid going to Radford doesn't have that same freedom if they want to earn a decent living

As someone who went to a directional state school and had no family connections, this is pretty true depending on your career & life goals. My non-STEM friends all seem to have made fine lives for themselves and are happy. From a more specific "career success" and $$ perspective, the STEM grads are making more. Almost moved away from our home state. Other majors are doing OK. Most stayed in our home state, but not all. Some went on to sales or other careers where income potential is unlimited.

If I was going to attend a top college paid for by my family, I may have chosen differently. But STEM has provided both my spouse and I with an extremely financially stable and privileged life, much more than either of our families of origin. Our kids will have more choices than we did, but we'll still help them consider employability as one factor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m married to a Humanities major from a top 10 university. He went into software consulting started @$39k and was making $300k when he went independent 5 years later and makes around $550k. Just a BA.

It's always hilarious when someone trots out a predictable, stupid anecdote like this, as if this experience, even if actually true, is in any way typical of people who have a humanities BA.

PP specified T10. If you go to a T10, it matters less what you major in. If you go to a directional state school, you either need a useful major, family connections, or a lot of luck. A kid at Harvard can major in history, sociology, or anything else they choose to and still expect to end up with a great career. A kid going to Radford doesn't have that same freedom if they want to earn a decent living

$550k is not anywhere close to typical even for Harvard humanities majors. Their earnings at age 45 will be much closer to $100k than $300k or $500k.

300k is still more than most people. Harvard will give them the ability to get on that track. A history major coming out of Salisbury State will need a lot of luck to ever end up on that kind of track.