Fun Things To Do With a Math Or Science Degree?

bxwatso writes "My niece just took the ACT and got a perfect score on the math section. 25 years ago, when I took the test, the kids who aced the math section were pretty special. Her score, combined with straight A's so far in high school, suggest to me that she might be able to go to a top university (MIT?) based on her math aptitude. The rub is that she doesn't like math or science, even though she finds them easy. She doesn't want to be an engineer or scientist. I thought the folks here would be a great group to ask: What are some creative, not too nerdy professions that nonetheless require a talent for math, engineering, or science?"

Comments

Be a teacher

[ub3r n3u7r4l1st]

My first girlfriend have like a perfect score (not just math, but 36 composite score) and are ranked in the top 5 in our class across 500+ students. She got a B.A. in elementary education last year. Probably an influence from her pastor.

Re:Be a teacher

[lysergic.acid]

what does "elementary education" have to do with math or science degrees?

in any case, if the ACTs are anything like the SATs then they're more of an indicator of general academic aptitude (including test-taking skills) rather than a measure of math ability, writing ability, etc. that's not to say that getting a perfect SAT/ACT score isn't impressive, and there's certainly a correlation between good students and good SAT/ACT scores. but they're not an indicator of intelligence--though they might be an indicator of college-preparedness. for instance, i have several friends who scored lower than me on the SATs who i know for a fact are much smarter than i am.

also, in my experience maths and sciences don't become very challenging until you get to about college undergraduate level material. and i don't think the SATs/ACTs really test for scholastic aptitude beyond 9th or 10th grade high school course material. a better indicator of whether a student excels at math/science would be the AP exams, which do cover things like calculus and college-level physics.

it's quite easy to excel in high school algebra & geometry, but the learning curve really shoots up once you get to multi-variable calculus/linear algebra or discrete mathematics. so you really shouldn't push a student into a math/science field that they're not interested in just because they find the high school material very easy. because once you get to college level courses, it quickly becomes a completely different story. and at that point it's vital that the student be interested in what he/she is studying, otherwise they won't have the drive to push ahead and will quickly get burnt out.

that said, the reason a student might not be interest in math/science in high school could be due to their high school math & science curricula not being challenging enough to hold their interest. if she isn't in AP classes then perhaps she should try to take some math/science courses at a local community college. that will help to expose her to what college-level maths & sciences are really like, which she might find more interesting. also, i think it's a bad idea to treat college as a trade school or vocational training. students should be free to take classes that pique their interest and follow academic pursuits that they enjoy. once you've found your niche and finish college, you can then decide where best to apply your acquired skills. otherwise you might as well go to a technical school.

Re:Be a teacher

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no math section on the ACT. It is a computation section that they call math. On the GRE it is called quantitative. University mathematics programs end up with many students who think they are good at math until they hit algebra and analysis and wonder what the hell happened. They tend to go on to become math teachers.

  When I was in grad school the best predictor of success in mathematics PhD programs was verbal GRE score, but nobody advises students who score perfect on the English portion of the ACT to think about being a mathematician. I wonder why that is.

She doesn't want to be an engineer or scientist. I thought the folks here would be a great group to ask

You are better off asking her what she wants to do. What is she interested in? If she has no idea then going to a large university where she'll be exposed to a number of different fields and opportunities is not a bad idea.

Re:Be a teacher

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know exactly how it's in the USA, but in my country (Austria, EU ;) ) high school math is like learning how to drive a car and university level math is like learning how to build a car.

You should be able to drive a car when you build one, but beyond that don't expect it to be the same.

I am currently in med school and I am thinking about quitting and doing math instead. (Med school is 6 years here and not like the pro school concept in the USA. So I don't have a BS degree yet)

And I've seen quite a few people who were great at Highschool math but quit the university within a few weeks, months top. It were the kind of people who didn't know what to do with their life, at that point. They thought, well you can earn lots of money with math so go study it.

My point: Don't push her into anything just because of her Highschool grades.

Re:Be a teacher

[amRadioHed]

Just because the immigrant students don't have perfect English skills doesn't mean they don't have excellent verbal skills. How they would do on a test in their native language would be more relevant.

Re:Be a teacher

[Smauler]

Wow, marketing is put forward as a serious alterative to scientific pursuits, and is +4 informative. I never thought I'd see the day slashdot. News for Nerds, Stuff that matters.

Re:Be a teacher

[Shadow of Eternity]

less knowledge, more memorization.

Re:Be a teacher

[Kachii]

I absolutely agree with this comment. I'm from the UK and I suffered the same fate that you wish to throw upon your daughter - being coerced into a specific degree program at a top London university just because I excelled in that area in my secondary (high) school, without realising myself what a change it would be from the material I had learnt thus far through my life. It certainly didn't do me any favours.

I am trundling along. I appear to have the required intelligence in order to complete my degree (or so I hope!) but damn is that learning curve STEEP.

Other than that, it strikes me odd that you can't come up with some viable and interesting options yourself. Basically, unless your daughter wants to be an elementary school maths teacher, she's probably going to be surrounded by it 24/7 for the rest of her life (researcher, anyone?). If she's not going to enjoy it, please, don't make her do it - and that includes cajoling her into believing it's the only thing she's possibly good at.

Instead of asking what you have here, I suggest you ask your daughter what she'd /like/ to do - see all the other degrees and/or career paths your daughter could take, excel in and enjoy and still lead a successful life at the end of it. It'll be like a voyage of discovery for you! - finding out what professions are good for your daughter, instead of the professions you can push her into despite her distaste for them.

Good luck.

Re:Be a teacher

[foobsr]

Instead of asking what you have here, I suggest you ask your daughter what she'd /like/ to do

Excellent point — I myself was pressed into (natural) 'science' because math was easy to me, which in the long run (decades) turned out to be a major desaster that I am still trying to recover from.

CC.

Re:Be a teacher

[drix]

As someone who is starting a math grad program next year and got an 800 on the GRE verbal, I can't tell you how happy I am to hear you say that :-) Boasting aside, I have always felt that people miss out on the distinction between mathematics and computation. Performing mathematical operations sequentially to arrive at an answer, a la a computer, is what you do on the SAT (and I assume the ACT as well.) This is a very different feat from sitting down with a math book and trying to wrap your ahead around a theoretical concept. To me, writing a proof has always felt like far more of a right-brained activity
than a left-brained one. When I'm thinking deeply about something mathematical, the feeling I get is akin to what I experience when playing music or drawing--completely different from performing addition and subtraction. I theorize that this is why a lot of math professors are crummy arithmeticians.

Re:Be a teacher

[leenks]

I agree - my sister was nearly pressured into an engineering route at college by schooling and sponsorship deals but stuck to her guns and has a postgraduate diploma in music performance on two instruments. She's very happy - she can do the music when the work is available for her instruments, and to fill in of the time can get "technical" positions in sales/marketing for engineering companies.

I'm going to get flamed and/or marked as a troll here, but from my observations the American way doesn't cater well for that kind of thinking. Everything appears to be about excelling and celebration of success, even if that means the child has to do something they don't really like doing - as long as they are very good then the praise and peer respect makes up for it.

Re:Be a teacher

[cayenne8]

Well, I wonder what the girl looks like? Pretty face? Nice rack? Slender figure?

With that...she really doesn't need a career...just marry a rich successful guy. Easy street the rest of her life. Higher math skills would just be an added perk.

Hell....wish I didn't have to work, and my main job was shopping. I need to find a sugar momma.

Re:Be a teacher

[vesuvana]

Interesting... In 1980 when I, a female, applied to an engineering program at CCNY, I was told by the Dean of Engineering that I couldn't possibly become an engineer because I had gotten an 800 (perfect score) on the English part of the SAT in high school. Now many years later, I am giving up writing, which even as a tech writer working with engineers has been a total bore to me, and I'm back in school enjoying the hard sciences once again. Two morals to this story: 1. She should do what interests her, no matter what her grades are in anything. 2. It is never to late to change direction, so don't worry about her. She'll figure it out on her own.

Re:Be a teacher

[russotto]

If you hate your job, where you spend so much of your waking time, life must be miserable. A good number of us reject the proposition that outside approval is the be-all end-all, though it doesn't seem to be the majority opinion.

With respect to the job: It's typically not the outside approval, it's the pay. A lower-paying job which you enjoy more is often not feasible; either you're not qualified (or "overqualified") for the lower-paying jobs, or they're same badness, less pay, or the drop in pay you'd have to take to get the better job is far too great; you wouldn't be able to do the things you enjoy on the lower pay. It'd be nice if there was some continuous scale where you could say, "Oh, I'll take 75% of the pay for a job which sucks 25% less", but there isn't. In general, I think doing something you don't want for the approval of others is pretty much a standard human thing, not an American thing. In fact, as a society America is probably LESS like that than many others -- Japan, for example.

funs things to do with the degree

[LingNoi]

Well you could ball it up and try and shoot it into a waste basket from a distance.

Make it into a paper aeroplane.

Burn it

Origami perhaps..

Yeah, that's all the fun things I can think of doing with a degree...

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell her to go into law or politics. It would be nice if a few more people in those areas had that sort of analytical ability.

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[martyros]

There's a link my brother sent me awhile back with a guy with an interesting theory about why there are more men than women in advanced sciences:

Because a PhD in science is a really poor career choice, and women are usually smart enough to avoid it, while men are much more likely to be sucked into it.

The fact is that if you have the brains and discipline to get a PhD in science and become a prof at MIT or Harvard, you could probably make a *ton* more money, and quicker, and have much more job security, going into medicine, law, or business. Or you could be slave-labour grad student for 7 years, then serfdom post-doc for 6 years, slave as an untenured professor for 6 years and then be fired... er sorry, "denied tenure" and be looking for a brand new job or an entirely new career at the age of 35.

But back to the question: one really good career path is to study engineering for undergrad because of the analytics and problem-solving skills it gives you, and then go into business or law. A lot of engineers make awesome businessmen because of the way they've been trained to think by their engineering education.

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[RobinH]

I don't know where you've been working, but I think middle management is full of engineers who were attracted into management by the "career promotion" but ended up sucking because management is all about the "softer" people skills, not analytical ability. Not that analytical ability doesn't hurt, but you need to be interactive, outgoing, etc..

Basically you could drop out of university half way through without taking any particular program, and still be successful in business if you just find the right combination of resources, need, and luck and put it all together at the right time.

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[martyros]

Yeah, management, entrepreneurship, business development, business strategy... all of these are completely different activities requiring different skill sets. What I was talking about wasn't engineers going into management, so much as engineers using their analytical thinking to optimize business practices, finding the best place / the best way to make money in a particular competitive landscape, making strategic alliances for growth, &c.

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, she should become a normal teacher and sometimes help out her brother on intergalactical astrophysics problems he can't solve while fighting the Goa'uld...

I think you mean the Wraith, not Goa'uld. The status of your geek card is currently under review, although your correct spelling of Goa'uld will be taken into account.

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[k2enemy]

There's a link my brother sent me awhile back with a guy with an interesting theory about why there are more men than women in advanced sciences.

http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in-science

Re:funs things to do with the degree

[Draek]

The fact is that if you have the brains and discipline to get a PhD in science and become a prof at MIT or Harvard, you could probably make a *ton* more money, and quicker, and have much more job security, going into medicine, law, or business.

Yeah. Too bad that for anyone thinking about getting a PhD in science or mathematics, getting a degree in medicine or working as a lawyer is about as interesting as watching paint dry. Perhaps even less so, since at least with paint you actually have time to do something interesting.

A very good friend of mine, who worked as a very well-paid IT consultant for a huge multinational, once told me something I found interesting, that my experience has shown to be true: "there's always good jobs for those who excel, so go with what you like, not what will make you the most money".

Or you could be slave-labour grad student for 7 years, then serfdom post-doc for 6 years, slave as an untenured professor for 6 years and then be fired... er sorry, "denied tenure" and be looking for a brand new job or an entirely new career at the age of 35.

Which is still better than making "teh big bux" for three years doing something you don't like, then making shitty money in a job you hate for the rest of your life after the entire field changes focus and you're left behind, your skills outdated by your lack of interest in the area. Sorry to burst your bubble, dude, but I've yet to meet someone who excels at their job and doesn't love it, be it in programming, sysadmin, mathematics, even music and photography. All this "follow the money" philosophy seems to create is mediocrity.

But then again, that plus your brother's quote explain the long-standing question of why are there so little, truly successful women out there ;)

Simple

[heretic108]

With her mathematical/scientific aptitude and overall intellectual capability, there's one very simple and satisfying career choice!

Re:Simple

[troll8901]

Or be a comic producer!

Obligatory links:

• XKCD
• FoxTrot GoComics
• FoxTrot Seattle Times

Re:Simple

[digitalhermit]

All kidding aside, being proficient in math and science often means that you have a leg up on almost any profession. Certainly there are some fields where it won't help, but the ability to reason and figure out what the numbers are really saying can help anyone from lawyers to doctors to politicians. For the latter, it's sometimes depressing how few understand math and science.

Now I don't know the reasons why the niece doesn't want to pursue a science/math career, but it's likely because the traditionally male dominated careers are from very early on discouraged to females. It's not an overt pressure, just the insinuations from teachers and peers. Girls get oven sets. Boys get chemistry sets.

For starters...

[Travoltus]

You could calculate how much it costs to fly to China or India, which is where you'll be going if you want a job outside of teaching.

How about medicine?

[damn_registrars]

Most prerequisites for medicine (or dentistry, veterinary medicine, or chiropractic school) are science classes. If she does well as math and science, she may way to consider those paths.

Re:How about medicine?

[ub3r n3u7r4l1st]

Medicine is great if you are prepared for the huge amount of student loan debt that comes with it.

Re:How about medicine?

[damn_registrars]

Medicine is great if you are prepared for the huge amount of student loan debt that comes with it.

There are a variety of ways to deal with that.

• There are several programs that will essentially relieve your debt if you do a few years rural practice
• Some schools have BS/MD programs for students who would otherwise be "traditional" pre-med in undergrad - finish the two degrees in less than the usual 8 years (and hence take in less debt)
• Research physician (MD/PhD) programs are usually paid in full by the school
• If you go into a high-paying specialty you will pull in enough money that your debt will be irrelevant

Re:How about medicine?

[bwalling]

Medicine is great if you are prepared for the huge amount of student loan debt that comes with it.

Well, the salary you'll get is more than enough to cover the debt. But, along the way, you'll get brainwashed about how "doctors don't make what they used to" by people who will then get in their Mercedes and drive home, never realizing that they make 6x the median income and many people can't even afford their services.

Don't get too excited.

[jfjfjdk]

At my mid-level university, one quarter of all students who made it past the second year in my rigorous program had perfect scores on both sections. The test really isn't that difficult these days, and even a moderate amount of targeted prep combined with a targeted curriculum puts you in a strong position; put her in a Putnam and we'll see what she's made of. MIT is the sort of unpleasant experience that should be reserved for those who genuinely want it.

Re:Don't get too excited.

[Hao Wu]

MIT is the sort of unpleasant experience that should be reserved for those who genuinely want it.

Absolutely, and so many people lose perspective on that. My philosophy is to aim for the top, minus one or two "points". In other words people who push themselves to the max seem to end up miserable.

Don't sell yourself short, by any means... Aim high high HIGH -- but be realistic.

Whatever that means!

Re:Don't get too excited.

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

I'd like to say, Aim High, but choose your target wisely. Many people, culture, common sense will all try and tell you what that highest goal should be. For God's sake, choose the goal your self.

Re:Don't get too excited.

[Zackbass]

For what it's worth my philosophy isn't to push yourself to the max, but just generally upward and see where it takes you. It landed me at MIT building robots and I'm about as far from miserable as I can get. Taking your chances and shooting high doesn't mean pushing yourself to the max all the time, just sometimes. And if you didn't do it sometimes how could you ever know what you're capable of?

Re:Don't get too excited.

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Forgot to add the homework assignment. Do your freakin' research before your choose your goal. You'd think that would be obvious, but it apparently isn't.

Re:Don't get too excited.

[porcupine8]

MIT is the sort of unpleasant experience that should be reserved for those who genuinely want it.

This, this, this. Though most of the time if she doesn't really want to go there, they'll catch it in the admissions process - but occasionally someone slips through b/c they did a good job of faking it for their parents' sake. I saw one of those people have an honest-to-god breakdown in her advisor's office.

Re:Don't get too excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no, no. I went to MIT, and had a blast. So did my roommate who majored in Music: the alternative and classical music expertise among a group of such intense people gets weird, but can be an amazing wealth of knowledge, and with Harvard and BU and the other Boston colleges, the music scene is a blast for students.

All the Ivy League schools have great opportunities to meet wonderful, brilliant people and learn from them, or teach them. Writing, art, history, nd even archaeogy can use good math skills. The question shouldn't be 'how do we get her to study science', but 'what does she want to do'.

Re:Don't get too excited.

[Anonymous Coward]

MIT is the sort of unpleasant experience that should be reserved for those who genuinely want it.

I did the MIT undergrad thing followed by basic science career path (PhD, post-doc - computational biology). I haven't yet made it to the tenured faculty position so maybe my views will eventually change - but I've been shocked by how hard it is to make a living off a career in basic science.

From what I've seen, trying to make a basic science career work is like trying to make an acting career work. There's the superstars that everyone hears about who are doing extremely well for themselves and there are those who move sideways into management who make pretty good money - but those who try to make a go of it doing the pure stuff (pure science / pure acting): well, that's not a recipe for financial success.

That's not to say that choosing a career in basic science is the wrong choice (either for me or in general), just that you shouldn't do it unless basic science is something that you are deeply committed to.

For myself, I found that I got pretty far along my career path doing what other people wanted me to be doing (rather than what I wanted to be doing myself) and I ended up in a place where, in the words of Arthur Dent, "I seemed to be having a problem with my lifestyle."

After some pretty tough times, I eventually started making my choices based on what I wanted and things have improved for me considerably (although the career side of things is still tough).

I guess what I'm saying is that if your niece were to end up in a basic science career because it was what you wanted for her (rather than what she wanted for herself) then she would probably be deeply unhappy for a whole variety of reasons.

It won't always be as easy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mastering the advanced concepts in Math and science is a lot more involved then High School. So if there is no interest, brilliance now could translate into mediocrity.

Re:It won't always be as easy.

[mysidia]

On the other hand.. the lack of interest could also be a partial result of the High School level math being dull and uninteresting.

A student may be lead to believe that all math is just as dull, simple, and tedious, as their immediate experience. And thus prejudice their view of the field as a whole...

Re:It won't always be as easy.

[Starayo]

Math in high school is extremely tedious, at least here in NSW, Australia. The textbooks are all "solve so-and-so", "find x", etc. Give me something to stimulate my imagination! Instead of x, make me find space hampsters!

Re:It won't always be as easy.

[thrawn_aj]

Mastering the advanced concepts in Math and science is a lot more involved then High School. So if there is no interest, brilliance now could translate into mediocrity.

THIS.

It's about your reference frame. High school math and science are piss-poor indicators of both difficulty and coolness. The tragedy is never that an originally interested student loses interest or gets bored due to college math/science. It is that the stuff gets exponentially more interesting (as you start doing REAL math that can serve as a REAL tool to understand the universe around you) while at the same time getting progressively more involved.

I won't say that it gets more difficult (it does get involved - as in lots of diverse concepts to integrate) on an absolute scale because it doesn't. Math is one of the VERY few fields that get easier with time IF (and only if :P) you build a strong foundation to begin with. Contrary to most fields, math truly requires you to have mastered everything and remember almost everything (rather - integrate it into your thinking until it becomes second nature) from semester to semester. My fellow students who refused to believe this are precisely the ones who faltered later.

That's one of the hard parts about taking math/science classes though. People are used to the idea (from the humanities perhaps) that information content in classes is sparse (low signal to noise) so that remembering the key points is sufficient. Quite so. TO put it simply, the humanities are noted for their verbosity (not a bad thing - in fact, sometimes it's the only redeeming feature in some otherwise redundant fields :P) while the sciences are noted for being too laconic. Perhaps we should sprinkle some 'noise' into the curriculum (Mythbusters anyone?). Unfortunately, some students tend to tune to the 'noise' in that case and miss the signal entirely :P.

But the history of math and science has been the history of consolidation (both of concepts and notation) until the information is packed VERY densely into the core curriculum. The problem with very high signal to noise in the transmitter is that you need a nearly lossless receiver or you lose a LOT of information. That is precisely what happens in math and science classes.

Remember: if a picture is worth a thousand words, an equation is worth at least a trillion :P.

But, I'm rambling. My point (to echo the parent) is simply that the high school curriculum is a ridiculous indicator of what to expect in college/grad school. Talk to some students/profs at a good university. Look at some course sites (MIT's open course ware is a god example).

The bottom line is that the "nerdiness" of a profession is a meaningless concept. People are nerdy, not professions. If you can't establish your own personality in what you do, you are merely a slave to social trends (or worse, a geek who gets his credo by following WIRED advice :P).

Sports statistician?

[eck011219]

Baseball statistician popped into my mind immediately, if she likes sports.

There's also a lot of number crunching in politics, too, and there's the potential of doing quite a bit of good for society. Or evil. You know, whatever she's into.

So...

[msuarezalvarez]

You could explain to her that neither math nor science in general is a `nerdy' profession, that she will outgrow her adolescence and that she will very soon hardly remember the names of her high school classmates. That there are peers out there to be had that are considerably more valuable than those who might have instilled in her that fear of nerdiness. That, in fact, she should do whatever it is she may want to do.

Re:So...

[mkcmkc]

Pretty good advice. Although I'd had a strong interest in computers from at least the age of 10 (and math since 5), reading those career counseling guides with pictures of nerdy-looking programmers in horn-rimmed glasses made me fear what my life would be like if I followed that path. So, instead, I wandered around in the wilderness for a few years, trying this and that and discovering what I wasn't good at. Finally, I returned to computers and it was quite a revelation.

I've no idea what'd be good in your case. Maybe just encourage her to keep an open mind and explore the possibilities.

Re:So...

[bwalling]

she will very soon hardly remember the names of her high school classmates.

Get a Facebook account. You won't be able to remember who they are, but you will have a list of the names and what they're doing every five minutes.

Science isn't always that nerdy...

[damn_registrars]

not too nerdy professions that nonetheless require a talent for math, engineering, or science

There are some areas of scientific research that really aren't all that terribly nerdy. What are her hobbies? If there is something that she does for fun, she may be able to find a scientist that works on making it better...

Not all components of scientific research happen in traditional lab environments.

Ask her what she likes to do.

[mswope]

You mentioned what she's good at. Try to find out what she likes and see if there's a match there. Sure, she's got the potential, but if she's not happy doing it - even if she follows it through, she's doing it for the wrong reasons. She'll probably not be happy doing it.

Women is science and games industry

[LingNoi]

The rub is that she doesn't like math or science, even though she finds them easy. She doesn't want to be an engineer or scientist.

As do most women in programming and the games industry which is why I find it ridiculous to pander to all this women in the games industry bullshit.

Let her do what she wants.

Re:Women is science and games industry

[metlin]

Let her do what she wants.

Indeed. If she wants to not use her math skills, that is entirely up to her. Why do you want to push her? One of my best friends took part in math olympiads and won - these days, she does fashion designing, and is quite happy doing that.

That's entirely her choice, and why not?

Re:Women is science and games industry

[Plutonite]

That is always good advice, but remember, at that age it is difficult to see the value of science. It is difficult to understand, even for college seniors in technical majors (math, natural sciences, comp.sci..etc), the immense benefit of being someone who understands how the world works. It usually takes a little sit-back and thinking to come to grips with the fact that you are proving things about the very nature of logic itself, or modelling the universe at levels the human mind did not really evolve to deal with. Anybody capable of doing science(esp at a high level), and enjoying this incredible meaningfulness and understanding (read:enlightenment) that comes as a result.. those people should be at least encouraged to pursue it. No harm could come from an honest suggestion. She may owe him so much for it later.

Re:Women is science and games industry

[LingNoi]

Anybody capable of doing science(esp at a high level), and enjoying this incredible meaningfulness and understanding (read:enlightenment) that comes as a result.. those people should be at least encouraged to pursue it.

But she quite obviously doesn't want to do that. Don't get me wrong, anything we can do to encourage more people, women or men to enjoy science, programming, physics, etc is great.

However I don't see any value in forcing people into the field if they quite obviously don't want to do it. I'd rather have enthusiastic people working with me, not clock watchers and that goes for both genders.

To answer the question of what she can do instead, all I can think of is uncreative jobs:
- accounting
- share trader
- lawyer
- marketing analyst (very math heavy)

All I can really suggest is maybe show her some cool things people make on hack-a-day and stuff like that and hope she picks up an interest.

However, maybe it's better that she doesn't want to do something creative so people seem to get paid more money. You can always encourage her to have a creative hobby outside of her work.

For a more serious answer:

[bytethese]

Federal Agent? Whether it be FBI, NSA, DEA, DHS etc. They need 'nerdy' people. Jobs in hot areas for them are Forensic Computing, Forensic Accounting, etc. I sure there are more but those require a math/analytical mind. Plus there's potential to shoot someone...

psychology

[sharp3]

If she enjoys psychology (or at maybe at this point just liked to talk on the phone a lot) she may want to consider that as a possibility. Research psych requires a lot of statistical and analytical skills

Digital Signal Processing?

[4D6963]

I was pretty gifted in mathematics when I was young, to the point I would easily win school-wide maths competitions despite not working and having skipped a grade. I never worked much on it anymore until my natural aptitudes weren't enough to keep up during high school (I must point out that I'm French and not American), and I got to college (CS) without even knowing what a complex number was or what the sigma sign represented. Then I dropped out of high school for numerous reasons, one being that I performed too poorly due to my lack of interest and investment, particularly in mathematics.

However at that time I had an idea which sounded pretty damn exciting, namely a spectrograph and spectrogram synthesiser, so I started this project and picked up C and digital signal processing, which progressively involved more and more mathematics until I would know everything about complex numbers, Fourier transforms and negative frequencies and would start scratching maddeningly long equations on sheets of paper.

Before I picked that up I thought maths were some sort of pointless intellectual masturbation that only really served mad scientists who write papers about crap like string theory, but when I found out how it relates to all that is multimedia, and even to our senses of sight and audition, it all became very alive and interesting, and the point is, with that sort of stuff you can do anything you want. You can make your own synthesiser and make music out of it, you can create your own visual effects, or you can work for a space agency's contractor and work on systems that will be sent in space, probably a handful of other stuff that could be "creative and not too nerdy". Not too sure what "not too nerdy" involves..

Re:Digital Signal Processing?

[4D6963]

They're only the tools of the trade, and besides, while I understand perfectly what the Fourier transform does, I couldn't in any way explain how it does it nor remember half of the equation. I just do like anyone else and use a fast already-existing and well-established implementation.

Duhhh!!!

[pottymouth]

I got a perfect score on my SAT's and ACT's. Graduated in the top 5 of graduate class at Cornell (1987) with a double Masters in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering.

I've been a highly paid male prostitute ever since. No kidding. Just ask my pim..err boss. I earn (well over) six figures a year and all I have to do is take it up the ass 5 days a week (occasionally 6)....

Tell your niece to become an entertainer or learn how to play a sport well (if she's black). She'll make more and have a hell of a lot better life than mucking around with technology all day long.....

Is that the right question?

[Hacksaw]

I think the question to ask is what would bring her the most joy, which might be the thing that challenges her. She should try a little of everything, and find the thing that engages her, makes her feel alive and driven.

I'd suggest looking into Howard Gardeners Multiple Intelligences writing to get an idea of the scope of the situation.

Re:Is that the right question?

[theLOUDroom]

I think the question to ask is what would bring her the most joy

Now that's just unrealistic nonsense.
People need to find a appropriate mix of a career that they can both enjoy, AND one that will also allow them to support themselves, pay back their student loans, and build a future for themselves. It's part of being an adult.

Simply put: You gotta eat. How many people do you think find their maximum joy as tax accountants?
I like to snowboard. It's a lot of fun. That doesn't mean I expect to make a living doing it. Yes, there are people who make a living doing it, but for every 1 that does there are 10,000 that don't. If you want to be a professional snowboarder, fine give it a shot. You might want to think up a reasonable backup plan that will keep you from flipping burgers for the rest of your life.

Or as Office Space put it:

Peter Gibbons: Our high school guidance counselor used to ask us what you'd do if you had a million dollars and you didn't have to work. And invariably what you'd say was supposed to be your career. So, if you wanted to fix old cars then you're supposed to be an auto mechanic.
Samir: So what did you say?
Peter Gibbons: I never had an answer. I guess that's why I'm working at Initech.
Michael Bolton: No, you're working at Initech because that question is bullshit to begin with. If everyone listened to her, there'd be no janitors, because no one would clean shit up if they had a million dollars.

Whatever she wants as long as it pays the bills

[davidwr]

Seriously. It's her life. As long as it's legal, ethical, and either it pays the bills, it doesn't matter if she's a garbage collector or a business tycoon. Yes, it may be better for society if she were to somehow use her talents, but if her interests lie elsewhere support her in her chosen path.

Give her your love, your emotional support, and to the extent you can and she needs it, practical/cash support.

Now, if you'd said she's trying to make up her mind between a math/engineering profession and one that doesn't require those skills, then I would strongly recommend steering her in the direction that her talents lie. But from your submission, it sounds like she's made up her mind.

Learning is fundamental

[Tjp($)pjT]

Anything. Math is the basis for biology, music, the arts (even if that math looks like chaos theory) and just about everything except (and maybe not except) philosophy. Actuary... Pay the "dues" for a few years then make big dollars and having been bored to tears the first years, get to figure out interesting problems. Like the likelihood of a death on a space trip to Mars. Useful in telling NASA how much their insurance will cost. Try to avoid being the bean counter set where you have the job of balancing law suit payouts versus thickness and grade of metal in vehicle gas tanks... But the MBA or PHD in economics from say Wharton combined with a bachelors in compsci, hard sciences, engineering, or even physics would put her a world ahead.

Re:Learning is fundamental

[Jerf]

just about everything except (and maybe not except) philosophy

I have no idea what current philosophy academics are interested in, so I can't accuse them of not keeping up. But if they aren't keeping up with AI, the Simulation Argument, Bayesian theory and other such statistical things, QM's implications for the many-worlds hypothesis, and computer science research into semantics, just to pull a few things off the top of my head, they are wasting their time in several fields traditionally included under the rubric of "philosophy" (epistemology, ethics, etc.).

We still have no rock-solid answers to speak of to the old questions, but for the first time in millennia, we actually have some data for some of them... and we're only going to be collecting more. And even what little data we have has opened up more questions; "what does it mean to be human?" will begin to take on new overtones when we start asking just exactly how augmented does an ape have to be before it is "human", just how smart does an AI have to be, and, of course, is a binary definition of "human" even feasible, and if not, what is? And so on.

(I know for a fact there are philosophers interested in this. I simply don't know if they are in or out of the mainstream. Certainly they will eventually be in the mainstream.)

Re:Learning is fundamental

[radtea]

Yeah, but I bet you're still teaching Liebniz's Law (the identity of indiscernibles) as if it was true, whereas it is known to be false since the 1920's. Quantum statistics tells us that with as much certainty as we know anything.

I know of a couple of people who are working on formal logics that violate Liebniz's Law, but they are in the tiny minority. What the others think they are doing is not clear, because they are certainly not working on logics that have anything to do with the universe we actually live in, where it is trivial to have two entities that are indiscernible by any means whatsoever, but that are not the same entity.

Having worked with a number of philosophers over the years, including ones from first-rate schools, I have been repeatedly appalled by both their ignorance of and lack of interest in ordinary scientific truth.

They still, for example, think the whole "brain in a vat" thing is interesting, which is laughable to anyone keeping up with neuro-chemistry and neuro-physiology, which are telling us that we think with a lot more than the lump of neurons at the top of the spinal chord, and that our ability to act on the world is at least as important as our ability to observe it (somehow philosophers tend to leave out effectors in their brain-in-a-vat fantasies.)

If you press philosophers on these subjects it turns out that they don't mean a REAL brain in a REAL vat, but some kind of fictional, imaginary brain that fulfils whatever conditions they feel like making up to make their argument go. Again, not so interesting if you think philosophy ought to be about more than mental masturbation over imaginary worlds. The use of fantasy thought-experiments in this way by philosophers, which is totally different from the carefully-controlled thought experiments scientists use as the starting point for some arguments, is a real problem.

And I've yet to meet a philosopher who understands conditional probability. See the rather sad debate over the "envelope game" to appreciate the consequences of that.

Then there's that funny guy in philosophy of science who asks "suppose we were to find a substance that was identical to water in every respect but was not H2O, but rather XYZ?" This question is discussed seriously in the philosophy of science, or was ten or fifteen years ago, whereas to anyone who knows anything about how science actually works it is either incoherent or stupidly uninteresting.

If my experience is at odds with yours, well good! I'm glad to see things are improving--there were signs of betterment on the horizon when I was involved with identity theory and quantum ontologies a decade or two ago, but it was clear there was a long, long way to go.

Re:MIT

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

(Bernake and many federal reserve bank chiefs hail from MIT)

Wait, I thought you said you had a stellar economics program...

Re:Econ

[ub3r n3u7r4l1st]

Most economist get their money by teaching and writing books, or put up a lot of speaking engagements. In that case you will need to go all the way to a PhD in Economics. A master's degree is not enough.

I'm good at math, but don't like it.

[kklein]

I'm pretty good at math, but don't particularly like it. Also, science is cool and I like reading about it, but it has always looked like a pretty dreary profession.

Basically, though, math skills are indicative of structured, logical thought. That is useful everywhere.

Don't push her into something just because she's good at it. Let her do whatever she wants. If she's smart, she'll probably be fine.

Whose choice is this?

[The Absurd Chemist]

"What are some creative, not too nerdy professions that nonetheless require a talent for math, engineering, or science?"

You are implicitly assuming here that your niece WANTS to make use of these things in her profession, which is a pretty bad thing to assume. Why don't you ask her what she wants?

I've experienced this constantly in my life. Relatives of all sorts tell me "You should become a doctor" or "You should become a radiologist" or whatever else. I turn around and say back to them, "Hmm, sounds like if you think radiology is so wonderful, maybe you should go back to school and become a radiologist."

It is, IMO, really rude to just start suggesting things to people. ASK what they like and what they want to do. If they don't know, there is no reason they even need to know yet.

Ask your niece what she is interested in and support her in her choice, or if she doesn't know what she wants to do, help her lead a life where it's ok not to know yet. Don't be a dick and try to force/coerce her into math or science just because she is good at it and you want her to do it. Being good at something doesn't automatically dictate that you will enjoy a career in that field.

Sounds like me

[sisina]

I'm a woman who aced the math ACT but didn't feel like studying math or science. I was into foreign languages. So now I have a bachelor's in Spanish and a master's in French literature, and I'm a web developer. Go figure.

What might have convinced me to study one of the hard sciences is seeing people actually at work using them. If I had met any pharmaceutical researchers or civil engineers or software developers and seen what they do at work every day, I might have found it more interesting. As it was, I had no frame of reference for working with math or science, and therefore no interest.

Re:Econ

[guacamole]

Graduate level economics is almost indistinguishable from graduate level math (or physics)

This is not true (and fortunately, thank god, functional analysis while applicable in theory, has little to say about relevant real world economics). People who say econ is no different from math, obviously haven't taken a serious pure math course. Graduate economics is somewhat technical and quantitative but is not rigorous or formal enough to be confused with a branch of mathematics (unless you take an advanced theory course, which is not representative of the field as a whole). At the same time, there is not enough dynamical systems in it to be confused with physics (I took a bunch of econ courses, and didn't have to solve one differential equation). But yes, econ a very quantitative, and so math,stat, or physics majors could feel at very comfortable in an econ program.

um, anything?

[Goldsmith]

Testing well, not wanting to work as an engineer or scientist (good luck landing a good research position if that rumor starts getting around)... if you're lucky you have a future medical doctor on your hands.

My sister was the same way: intuitively good at science, but socially programmed to not like it (is this more common in women?). It looks like she's going to study medicine. After having multiple family members, then friends, then professors tell her that she was good at scientific thinking she gradually veered towards a field she could both enjoy and excel in. I think forcing her to study a hard science would have been a big mistake.

Just tell her that everyone changes their major (more or less true) and to take her time deciding what to do with her life.

How does she know?

[LihTox]

Her school experience with math is probably limited to figuring (arithmetic, algebra, calculus), which is nothing like what real mathematicians do (geometrical proofs are closer-- if geometry was her favorite math class then she is fonder of "real mathematics" than figuring, a good sign). Similarly, a career in the sciences is hard to extrapolate from a typical high school science course. In both cases, she has probably yet to see the creative side of science and math, which is where all the fun is. I'm a bit too tired to think of concrete demonstrations for her, but I might say to her, "Look, you have a talent, and life is smoother if you're working in a field in which you have talent. Of course, if you don't actually like the field then talent won't help, but try it and keep an open mind." You might try arranging a meeting with a research scientist, mathematician, or engineer. (There are also high school level competitions which could be fun, although they do look geeky.)

Of course, if she doesn't like it, she doesn't like it-- but I hear a lot about the subtle pressures which keep the male-female ratios in physics and engineering high, and so I wonder if her reluctance is due to personal taste or peer pressure (or maybe even some teacher one time told her she was bad at math, and it stuck with her regardless of current successes).

Math is a life prereq

[acozer]

A good ACT score doesn't means she is a math genius nor that she needs to find a career that requires good math skills. Math is a prereq for life in general and pretty much all careers today require good logical and analytical skills that depends on strong math knowledge. Having a good ACT math score should be the rule, not the exception. Unfortunately every day we see more and more stupid people out there. Being "normal" makes you "intelligent" and this is starting to become an exception. Look at the average number of books individuals read in the US per year and compare this with 25 years ago. You will be astonished.

Re:Econ

[TubeSteak]

(I took a bunch of econ courses, and didn't have to solve one differential equation)

It is very easy to get an undergraduate degree in econ without knowing anything more than algebra and some statistics... BUT that doesn't mean differential equations aren't involved, it just means your profs didn't go the extra step and show you the calculus happening behind all those wonderful graphs. And honestly, it means you didn't get your money's worth.

If you took graduate level econ courses without touching differential equations... I really don't know what to say. For any degree in economics, one would be very well served taking as much pure math as they can handle.

That said, a minor or (double) major with statistics can take you into almost any field you like, since everyone needs people to crunch and interpret numbers.

Math required for Econ

[Anonymous Coward]

You took the wrong courses - plenty of undergraduate econ classes require fairly advanced Math - especially the ones that necessary for being able to succeed in grad school.

The econ classes divide into two different types - 1) the crap where you talk about lines on graphs where the most complicated math involved is y=mx+b. 2) The hard stuff that is required to prepare you for grad school. Most people self-select into the easy stuff.

Here's an example of an undergrad course that most every grad school econ student should have completed in their undergrad work - http://www.washington.edu/students/crscat/econ.html

ECON 481 Introduction to Mathematical Statistics (5) NW
Probability, generating functions; the d-method, Jacobians, Bayes theorem; maximum likelihoods, Neyman-Pearson, efficiency, decision theory, regression, correlation, bivariate normal. Prerequisite: STAT/ECON 311; either MATH 136 or MATH 126 with either MATH 308 or MATH 309. Recommended: MATH 324. Offered: jointly with CS&SS/STAT 481; A.

Look at those pre-reqs:

Math 126/136 - 3rd quarter of calculus or honors 3rd quarter of calculus - Introduction to Taylor polynomials and Taylor series, vector geometry in three dimensions,introduction to multivariable differential calculus, double integrals in Cartesian and polar coordinates.
Math 308 - MATH 308 Matrix Algebra with Applications (3) NW
Systems of linear equations, vector spaces, matrices, subspaces, orthogonality, least squares, eigenvalues, eigenvectors, applications. For students in engineering, mathematics, and the sciences.
MATH 309 Linear Analysis (3) NW
First order systems of linear differential equations, Fourier series and partial differential equations, and the phase plane.
MATH 324 Advanced Multivariable Calculus I (3) NW
Topics include double and triple integrals, the chain rule, vector fields, line and surface integrals. Culminates in the theorems of Green and Stokes, along with the Divergence Theorem.

They don't even bother to list differential equations as a pre-req as it is pre-req for other classes listed above.

Many years ago, I took the above mentioned ECON 481 when I was a senior in college (thinking I wanted to go on to grad school). I was very good at math and science I had tested out of freshman year calculus via AP exams (5 on the Calc BC), and physics (5 on the Physics C w/ Caculus and Physics E&M exam), and went on to take second year physics and second and third year of math and done very well in all of them.

Even with all of that preparation when it came time to take ECON 481, it was a struggle - probably the hardest class I ever took.

Re:Math required for Econ

[Malekin]

ECON 481 Introduction to Mathematical Statistics (5) NW
Probability, generating functions; the d-method, Jacobians, Bayes theorem; maximum likelihoods, Neyman-Pearson, efficiency, decision theory, regression, correlation, bivariate normal. Prerequisite: STAT/ECON 311; either MATH 136 or MATH 126 with either MATH 308 or MATH 309. Recommended: MATH 324. Offered: jointly with CS&SS/STAT 481; A.

Look at those pre-reqs:

Math 126/136 - 3rd quarter of calculus or honors 3rd quarter of calculus - Introduction to Taylor polynomials and Taylor series, vector geometry in three dimensions,introduction to multivariable differential calculus, double integrals in Cartesian and polar coordinates.
Math 308 - MATH 308 Matrix Algebra with Applications (3) NW
Systems of linear equations, vector spaces, matrices, subspaces, orthogonality, least squares, eigenvalues, eigenvectors, applications. For students in engineering, mathematics, and the sciences.
MATH 309 Linear Analysis (3) NW
First order systems of linear differential equations, Fourier series and partial differential equations, and the phase plane.
MATH 324 Advanced Multivariable Calculus I (3) NW
Topics include double and triple integrals, the chain rule, vector fields, line and surface integrals. Culminates in the theorems of Green and Stokes, along with the Divergence Theorem.

I really don't mean to sound like a snob, but that stuff doesn't strike me as particularly esoteric. I was led to believe that in the US system, the first digit of the unit code typically represents the year it is taken at. Taylors series and multivariable calculus is high school maths. Seriously, the chain rule is introduced at third year? Fourier series is something you should have a handle on in high school physics (fundamental wave behaviour) and have codified in first year. Third year mathematics should be things like advanced cryptanalysis, combinatorics, fluid dynamics, geometry and topology, not introduction to the concept of a matrix or a double integral.

If this is the general standard set by US universities, you're worse off than I thought you were.

Art

[muridae]

Okay, now that everyone here is done laughing, let me explain the logic.

I'm working my way through a CS degree. The math classes are interesting, but the CS stuff is all 'we'll pretend this is how theory works out in the real world, while pretending to teach you how the theory works in the labs.' Interesting, but not particularly useful except when teaching. Somehow, without any art background other then some highschool photography, I got into a Cyberart cross discipline class. I expected to be the hired coder, there, just working on someone else's idea. Turned out to be the best class I've ever taken.A year later, I'm working for the Art Department, writing code for 3 different grants and two class projects.

And no, CS wasn't a pre-requisite for any of these projects.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Would have to work for the MRS degree...

[SmokeyTheBalrog]

My god, it's the complete Red vs Blue set of trolls.

I wonder what they go for on ebay?

Item #xxxxxxxxxx
Matching set of trolls.
Look exactly the same except for hair. (Hair colors: Over Antagonizing Red, and Very Melancholy Blue)
(Bridge not included)

In need of a good home, and a lot of lightening up.

Buy it now?

Economics is little more than numerology

[dbIII]

functional analysis while applicable in theory, has little to say about relevant real world economics

Hang on. When did they put away the tea leaves and numerology and start putting together working models of very complex systems like portions of an economy? You'll be telling me there are economists that consider non-linear relationships between things next.

Anecdote: The leading Australian economist's answer to a low wool price was to kill a lot of sheep to make wool scarce. That actually happened. A lot of farmers dutifully killed off most of their flocks, wool was a bit rarer but the price didn't go up because cotton exists. That's some "real world economics" as an example to show how stupidly simplistic their models are and how riduculously overcondent they are about them.

...if she has any clue

[JavaRob]

The tough thing for high schoolers trying to choose a college, major, FUTURE, etc. is that they usually have no *clue* what they'd like to do in the real world, because they haven't had much contact with it.

The vast majority of science and math education for a high schooler is learning how to jump through mental hoops and regurgitate information to pass exams. There's a big gap between studying a subject in school and *using* the skills related to a subject in a job somewhere.

A lot of job satisfaction lies in working with people you respect, who respect you for playing an important role in fulfilling whatever goal the company has. The tasks you perform should also ideally fall into a comfort zone where you're using your talents without being in way over your head.

I tend to think most kids will do best with a broad education with as many internships, etc. as possible, so they can try out different kinds of work environments.

The highschooler in question might end up using math in her job -- if she's good at it, that part will go easily -- and may well be extremely interested if she's interested in the goal she's actually accomplishing. Why would she need to be interested in jumping through hoops?

Find out what you enjoy

[cbrew]

High school math and science are not as much fun as the things that a good college education can show you. Math and science skills can serve you really well in linguistics, psychology, marketing, political science, cognitive science, neuroscience, biology, finance, business, medicine and other fields. I teach linguistics and computer science, and recommend both, but the key thing is to encourage her to take a look at several possibilities early in college, or even sooner. Two other thoughts: firstly, peer group is important, any subject is nicer if you are doing it in group of people you like and get on with. Secondly, as people have said, the standard high school subjects do get much more interesting with further study.

Why Are Nerds Unpopular?

[arkarumba]

I'm not sure if this applies directly, but your query reminded me of a great article Why are Nerds Unpopular that some here may enjoy.

If you decide it appropriate for your neice to read, it may spark some discussion comparing school maths/science to university maths/science. Find out what she is interested in.

One way ahead is to encourage her to consider only a five year career plan. Neither she nor yourself should feel her choices NOW lock her into a lifetime in one career. People often don't find out what the REALLY want to do with their lives until they've been in the real world for a few years. She should leave her options open. Encourage her to do whatever she feels like doing now, but whatever course, keep some higher level maths as a minor. It may end up giving her the edge someday.

stewarts "letters to a mathematician"

[e**(i pi)-1]

A degree in math opens the door to many other areas: computer science, any other science, teaching or management. It essentially provides the flexibility and ability to think abstractly. Doing mathematical research is only one option, the actual work can be very applied. A good math education teaches naturally how to understand a complex issue, reduce it to a model which can be solved. Starting with "hard science" makes other areas easier to understand. A good reading for a student pondering the question whether math is an option is Ian Stewart's book "Letters to a young Mathematician".

Why be a teacher?

[DoctorTuba]

This seems to me to be rather shortsighted and doesn't really address the question. One of the problems we see in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) fields is that women who would be good at them tend to eschew them for the obvious nerd reasons. I have a strategy that I use with my students that has had some success. It's certainly not my idea but I have seen it work. What you should help her do is discover uses for STEM that appeal to what research has shown women want in careers - the ability to make a difference at a personal or social level. Sure, teacher qualifies, but so does electrical engineer working on alternative energy technology for developing or areas, or civil engineer working on new construction techniques for building with local materials, or biochemist working on physiological or pharmacological problems in health and disease. You don't have to design chips, or bridges, or bio weapons. And there are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of other career paths like these that she could imagine herself if you support and encourage her. Will it make her time in an undergrad or graduate program any easier? Nope. Still the "boy" culture, still plenty of hard work to do, still many times she'll want to chuck it all. But if she can keep her goal(s) in mind and remember that school is just a short time in the overall scope of her future she can do it. I have examples in my own life of whom I'm very proud so I know it can work.

A cautionary tale - been there, done that.

[pomegranatesix]

Totally agree with above post. Here's a little cautionary tale for you, from a girl who was pushed into a science major:

I scored above the 99th percentile on my SAT, ACT, as well as the ASVAB (one of the qualifying tests to join the military.) In fact, I just about maxed out the scores on the ASVAB - my recruiter wanted to photocopy and frame my scores in the recruiting office. I usually scored higher on the verbal sections than math sections on all of the above tests, but I was still in the top few percentiles. Given all that, I thought I was hot shit.

In high school, I had only had slightly-better-than-average grades because I didn't enjoy doing homework, but I generally did very well on my exams. I took a lot of AP and honors courses in both math/science subjects as well as the liberal arts, and breezed through them. Then when it came to college, I got a full scholarship to a state school. I matriculated as a biochemistry major because 1.) I've always done really well in those related subjects and 2.) my father is a biochemist, and he pushed me to follow in his footsteps. It was not my top-choice college, but I went there because it had good reputation and the scholarship was quite persuasive as well.

Long story short, I flunked out of college. Miserably. It only took me a semester before I was put on probation, a year to before I lost my scholarship, and then another year before they put me on academic suspension for not making the minimum grades. I hated my major, I hated my courses, and I hated everyone at my school. I didn't even bother attending my classes most of the time. I could rarely be bothered to even leave my room.

Anyway, I was too afraid to tell my parents that I flunked out of college... so I didn't. Instead, I told them I was doing fine, and became a stripper to pay for an apartment away from home and to attend community college while I figured myself out. Before I became a stripper, I also considered the possibility of running away to another country and suicide - being an academic failure is THAT big of a deal in my family, and I was THAT upset about it. I actually managed to pull this off for a while, until I couldn't take pressure of living a double life anymore.

I eventually 'fessed up to my parents. I pulled up my grades enough to transfer to another school. Unfortunately, I'm still a biology major for practical reasons - despite me failing so miserably at my last institution, I managed to pass enough courses in my major that my fastest route to graduation is to continue in my major. I am under a lot of parental pressure to graduate as soon as possible - for them, it's a great source of shame and embarrassment amongst our family and friends to have a daughter who didn't graduate college in 4 years.

Honestly, if I could do it all over again, I wouldn't have even gone to college at all until I was sure of what I wanted to do. I didn't discover my love and talent for physics until just last semester, when I aced my physics course. (Until then, I had always done rather poorly in physics - another reason why I chose biology/chemistry.) If time and money weren't issues, I'd probably pursue a degree in either engineering or physics instead of biochemistry. It's amazing what motivation can do - despite my past track record of laziness, I'm actually doing quite well now. My current school is a lot more academically rigorous than my last one - if I had put in a quarter of the effort that I am putting in now, I probably would've graduated a year early and with honors, no joke.

I'm not going to lie - being a stripper was probably one of the best and most formative experiences of my until-then overly sheltered life. I learned a lot about myself, about other people, and about the way the world works. It was a better education than I could've gotten at school. It also changed me to WANT to become a better person and to WANT to use my (other) talents to do useful, constructive things. Without all that, even if I had managed to pull up my grades to go back to school to please my parents, I probably would've fallen back into a cycle of avoiding class and failure all over again.

Moral of the story is, let her do what she likes - for herself, and not to please you or anyone else.

the pressure goes the other way

[r00t]

Lots of women are being pushed HARD into science
and engineering. They seem to resist this.

Is it so hard to believe that different hormones
might result in different behavior? Why must we
judge this as a bad thing? Why must we judge the
value, even the economic value, of a person in
dollars or euros or whatever?

Maybe she'd like to stay home. Why can't she?
There won't be too many bright people in the
next generation if today's bright people focus
on for-pay careers. That's how evolution works;
it'd be good IMHO to resist becoming a world
full of idiots. Smart people should have kids
too, not just the dumb ones.

It's even rewarding. She can homeschool a dozen
bright kids. Really, it's extremely rewarding
and it's a full-time job.