Slashdot Mirror
What's Your College Major Worth?
Hugh Pickens writes "The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that with tuition rising and a weak job market everyone seems to be debating the value of a college degree. Anthony P. Carnevale, director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, says talking about the bachelor's degree in general doesn't make a whole lot of sense, because its financial payoff is heavily affected by what that degree is in and which college it is from. For the first time, researchers analyzed earnings based on 171 college majors and the differences are striking: For workers whose highest degree is a bachelor's, median incomes ranged from $29,000 for counseling-psychology majors to $120,000 for petroleum-engineering majors but the data also revealed earnings differences within groups of similar majors. Within the category of business majors, for instance, business-economics majors had the highest median pay, $75,000 while business-hospitality management earned $50,000. The study concludes that while there is a lot of variation in earnings over a lifetime, all undergraduate majors are worth it, even taking into account the cost of college and lost earnings with the lifetime advantage ranging from $1,090,000 for Engineering majors to $241,000 for Education majors. 'The bottom line is that getting a degree matters, but what you take matters more,' (PDF) concludes Carnevale." Last week we learned that dropping out of college could earn you $100,000 in start-up money for your business.
As a grad student in engineering that has seen nearly all his friends at the BS, MS, and PhD levels all able to find good paying, stable jobs, I had grown pretty tired of the stream of /. articles from Ivy League tenured professors of religion ranting about how our education system is all wrong.
What about the ones that did not find the job in their field, and are deep in .... with a debt, low paid job, insecurity, wasted time, etc.....How are they measured in this statistic?
We're pretty lucky that you can exhaustively define the value of a degree by how many dollars you can get with it. Aristotle wept.
Now working as a programmer, I can say it was obviously worth it.
I'm just paraphrasing some of the comments on TFA here. Some of the fields need a Masters or PHD to enter the profession. Not surprising that a bachelors degree in Psychology gets you diddly squat, if you need a Phd to get licensed.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
No shit, Sherlock.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Unfortunately for huge number of students, they end up with a worthless degree and a huge debt, and the reason for this, is that the government provides the loans, the universities/colleges jack up the prices simply because they know that the money will be transfered to them from the government and students are used as collateral.
The reason why many people major in things that are worthless and not in say engineering that is useful in oil production is because most people do not really need to go to college in the first place, they don't have the aptitude for it, but they are pressured into it by the system, which tells them now that without that degree, they won't be able to find ANY job, never mind job in some profession, because they are told that everybody has a degree, so not having a degree is like not having your 10 or 11 or 12 grade (or whatever the highest grade in high school for different Western nations).
Now, in reality this is nonsense, most of the people who major in sociology or something like that, would be much better off without a degree, going to a trade school or even just offering their services at a huge discount to a potential employer, say at 10-15% of what the normal starting rate is, but then after 4 years those people wouldn't have thousands of dollars of debt, would have 4 years of experience and would have a job.
The problem is that many are told that without a college degree you'd make like a million dollars less over life time than with a degree, but consider what it would take you to pay out say a 100-200K mortgage over decades with interest and you'll quickly realize that it's nonsense, it's better to start with a clean slate than to be in deb at the tender age of 22 or so. Also understand that those who'd make more money, they are people who would have gone to college anyway, because they have the ability - aptitude. People are not equal, don't fool yourself.
Get a trade profession, offer your services at a discount, get a job, start your own business, do NOT go to college unless you want to be a doctor or an engineer or a professor for sure.
You can't handle the truth.
Everyone knows that higher education is in a bubble. This type of article just show that everyone now recognizes it.
The causes are clear. The government subsidizes loans, making it easy for students to take on more debt and for colleges to jack up tuition. Companies just use a degree as a proxy for basic competency. The list can go on.
However, the real question is how will the bubble burst. What will happen? I have no idea. But it can't go on. You can't have 18 year olds wrecking their entire financial future for a degree.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
What you love doing or can cope with doing for 40 years in a row.
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
Here's my anecdote/data point: I graduated last August from with a professional degree from a respected state university. Immediately thereafter, I was unemployed for six moths, and as of right now, I'm doing contract work and earning less take-home pay (after you figure in self-employment taxes) than I did the summer after I graduated from high school. So for me, figuring expenses, lost wages, etc., college works out be worth about -$200,000.
This economy sucks.
In 2002 the US Census Bureau calculated that the value of an average degree over a lifetime was $2.1 million
Has the value dropped that much in 10 years? Taking inflation into account, the value's gone from roughly $2.6 million down to less than $1 million? I know we're comparing average to median here, but I have a hard time believing Warren Buffett et al are skewing the numbers by a factor of 2.5+.
What do you do with a BA in English?
FTA: "'The image higher education carries of itself as a large liberal-arts institution where everyone sits on the lawn and reads Shakespeare," he says, "hasn't been true since the 70s.'"
Sigh... that's my major. Not that i don't love what I study, but even if I pretend otherwise, it always hurts a little bit when I get asked what my major is and upon hearing it's in the arts I get the famous, "what are you going to do with it?" question.
I have friends who are pursuing majors like "Art History". What on earth can you do with that? Maybe work in a museum (VERY few jobs there) or teach. That's about it.
As much as a person might be interested in that kind of thing, it seems on some level like you have look to the future a little bit and consider that you will need to make money.
It seems to me that there are a handful of majors like that - things that are damn near 100% unemployable. They don't seem to show up in this ranking but I wonder what becomes of those folks.
The point of getting a degree from college isn't to learn vocational skills, it's to more generally broaden yourself and to learn how to learn. The whole notion that your degree should directly influence your earnings is reflective of how today many people go to college to get vocational training. If you want to teach mathematics, you shouldn't get an education degree in college, you should get a mathematics degree, and then go on to teaching from there. If you want to go into business, learn some more fundamental skills like statistics and critical thinking, intern over your summers, and then go to business school for your MBA.
Perhaps even more troubling is the notion that the sole goal in life is to make more money. What about doing a job that you enjoy, even if it pays less?
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
Blimey, I didn't know you could get degrees in that! Very lucrative if you get contacts with the bible-bashing family-values congress critters.
Nursing is an interesting example of this problem. 5-6 years ago the industry was screaming for help, so tons of new nursing programs opened at universities and were quickly filled. Today, those nursing grads are having a horrible time getting work. It's not like you can just put your chosen career on hold for 2-3 years while the economy recovers.
Dropping out of college might be good for some people, but....
and maybe I am dumb, but I learned a LOT my last two years of college. Those were the hardest years (as far as my major was concerned), and also where I got to take the most interesting classes like AI and compiler design. I strongly suggest not dropping out of school. On the other hand it worked for Bill Gates.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
All undergraduate degrees are worth it? Bullshit. Worth it compared to what? Averaging the earnings of high school graduates with college graduates, and then concluding that the college degree was worth it is complete BS. The choice is never "high school" or "college" (since neither are generic career paths). Even worse is then comparing the breakdown of different majors compared to the entire aggregate of high school grads. (Hint, there's delineation of earnings within High School grads. Some people work as plumbers, and some people work as ditch diggers).
"was it worth it" is an extraordinarily complex question to answer, even if you base it just on earnings. It can only be answered by the choices the individual has, and certainly not answered using aggregate statistics. If you want to make economic decisions based on career paths, that might be useful. I think we all know stopping your education at High School and deciding to wait tables the rest of your life at Perkins is going to be a bad economic choice. But what about becoming an electrician, plumber, or roofer compared to getting an undergrad in psychology and being a counsellor earning (apparently) 29K a year? I'd guess the skilled trades have the undergrad in psychology beat.
The point being, there's a hell of a lot more choices beyond "do I go to college, or not".
Money is not finite because value can be created but time is finite so mindshare is finite. Given that assumption, how big can the average business be if everybody drop from college and start a business? Probably they'll be small because they won't be able to attract enough customers. When that happens staying in college will let you get hired by one of the big businesses and make more money than if you were an entrepreneur. It's a variation of the law of diminishing returns. Probably this one has a name on its own and somebody out here knows it.
The idea that a college education is an interim between high school and a career is foolish. I've only completed my Associates' degree up to this point, and i know it's worthless in the current job market. School isn't just a stepping stone in my career. I went to the local community college on grants and scholarships. I took classes that I'm interested in, and I came away with an A.S in Information Science. During my time in school I found other people like myself who enjoyed what they were doing and excelled in their learning experience. I also encountered other people. These people viewed their coursework as a means to an end and plenty struggled with it. Some people struggled until they broke down and quit.
I understand that there are careers out there that require strong backgrounds in the maths and sciences. That should have a prerequisite of rigorous study in those topics. However, jobs outside that domain are better served by individuals with experience. For example, I think a person with years of retail experience is more beneficial in a lower to middle management position at a store than someone who has a degree in management but never manned a register or stocked shelves. There are certain nuances of retail culture that can only be gained with experience. This applies to any other profession as well.
Im currently in the market for a position on an IT support team. I've seen numerous job postings that require a bachelors' degree with a "we train" clause. Or a minimum wage position that requires a degree + x years of experience. C'mon, a high school grad with a mild interest in computers could man a tier 1 support line. I'd expect most BA/BS candidates to scoff at a minimum wage position.
Frankly, it's taking a fair amount of discipline not to get four or five degrees, simply because I haven't run out of fields which absolutely fascinate me. Along the way, I'm finding very few classes I don't actually enjoy, and it's certainly more fun than real work.
If I was just in it for the money, I'd be a mainframe expert -- it's easy, but there are few enough of them (because no one wants to do it) that it's also very well paid. But then I would hate my life. As it is, I'm likely to end up in some sort of software development, but that's not going to stop me from studying the more interesting bits of biology and cosmology, because the universe is awesome.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I wonder if this esteemed study included guys like Bill Gates, Sergey Brin, etc. Their inclusion might skew the results a tad.
once you get past the race and gender tables. The actual facts about the comparative values of various majors starts around Table 30.
The problem with looking at this from a race/gender perspective is that the data tells us almost nothing about why there is a difference between these categories. For example, the study reveals that Petroleum is a specialty major, that 100% of the people who majored in it are men, and that this major has the highest median income.
OK, facts noted. Does this mean that men are better suited to be Petroleum Engineers than women? There's no way to tell from this data set. Maybe women would be great petroleum engineers, but they don't choose it because it sounds like it would be uninteresting or unpleasant or too inflexible.
What we _can learn from the data is that if you want a major that will bring in a steady, terrific income, Petroleum Engineering and other specialty majors are pretty awesome. The Study makes it pretty clear that people with "hard" majors make about twice as much as people with "soft" majors, so if money is your thing, pick a hard major. Put another way, if what you love to do is a soft major, prepare yourself for a life where you will never be tempted by the siren call of enormous wealth.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
There are a few Tech / IT apprenticeship / training / programs out there that are not your Tech school / University of Phoenix type school. But are a real training / internship. As there are a lot of people that are not cut out for College or can't pay for it. There needs to be more hands on and less tech the test / the book type CS classes. Also in 4 year College there is way to much math that has little use in IT. Electrical, HVAC and plumbing is not 4 years in a class room loaded with theory no it's mixed class room with real on the job! and the class room is a lot hands on as well.
It should be kept in mind that most of this is, of necessity, old data. It probably doesn't have a lot of relevance to a time in which college degrees are, in many fields, simply losing their relevance.
By definition, old data cannot keep up with rapid new trends.
I went to college through my PhD studying electrical engineering. I made sure that I did not leave college with debt (in fact I had an IRA). In order to make this happen, I lived inexpensively (no car, roommate as an undergraduate student, housemates as a graduate student), I worked 20+ hours per week as an undergraduate student and I earned fellowship and research assistant ships as a graduate student. After that, I went on to a carrier in electrical engineering that has been very lucrative.
I never finished college, because real life obligations got in the way. However, I've made a career for myself in the "arts" category; I write, do a bit of illustrating and some performance stuff. I've always thought that arts degrees were a scam. You either have talent or you don't. Without a degree, I earn within that range. Highly technical degrees *should* make the most money. They're harder, and they accomplish more. I really think that the only degrees that are worth anything are the ones that are not subjective.
that of all possible career paths, education has the lowest financial incentive? What does this portend for our future?
College studies don't help that much, but not having the sheepskin now hurts a lot as it is used to filter on conformity, race, parental investment, age, and some other things, many of which are now illegal to ask about on job applications...
Lots of links here:
http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-October/005379.html
http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-November/005584.html
http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-November/006005.html
Also, google on "college bubble".
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
I wonder: I read this book the other day, it cost me 10 euroes, will it be worth it in the job market?
It's not clear from TFA, but it doesn't appear that they have taken mortality into account. So they're selling the 'lifetime payback', but that assumes you have a lifetime.
..if you don't like your job. (no, not salary)
...you can sure as hell vote, die for your country, get tried as an adult, and make a huge decision (i.e. where to attend college + what to study in college) that will affect you for the rest of your life!
Higher-level math helps you reason about problems and helps you be able to analyze the tradeoffs of different approaches. It's certainly not "of little use"; at least it hasn't been to me.
Developing good software isn't easy and to do it well isn't something that you "just do". Yes, hands-on experience is extremely useful (and fun!), but having "class room[s] loaded with theory" is very important too.
Well, I know with what I do in computer game programming, I wouldn't hire an apprentice. There is simply very little work for those who are not bringing their own expertise, since doing takes seconds but figuring out what to do takes hours, people are there to figure out what to do, not to be shown what to do. Resignations and redundancies are so close that training someone for more than a few weeks makes very little sense from an economic perspective. Guys who are good, especially really creative programmers tend to be impossible to work with until they are in their mid 20s, if someone doesn't believe they are God at 19, they've probably not got the meager talent required to impress themselves and aren't going to be much good anyway. Best that someone goes to university where they get plenty of challenges, people to share with, qualified teachers and plenty of time to practice their trade rather than being stuck doing the boring work, probably badly in a team that doesn't need them.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
I dropped out of University and eventually persued vocational and on-the-job training. I now earn the equivalent of US $175,000 a year and consider myself reasonably comfortable.
While getting a degree could be considered a nice 'lift' up the ladder early on, graduates are often considered rather green in industry and often the type of people who won't like to get their hands dirty - to be honest, in these economic times, that isn't what employers want!
What about doing a job that you enjoy, even if it pays less?
Yes, indeed, what greedy little bastards they are, trying to make money.
College aged kids today are lucky to get jobs that pay them enough to keep a (rented) roof over their heads and cover their health insurance. "A job that pays less" means giving up the necessities of life (food, shelter, debt repayment, healthcare.)
What terribly useless degree did I get? I got a B.S. in biology. I have a Masters in genetics. I'm currently in a top PhD program in biology. I have two publications, both from undergraduate research. But my qualifications have no relation to my argument - I learned that in philosophy 101, reasoning & argument.
The more relevant point: I went to a small liberal arts school. I took classes in music, English, philosophy, the sciences, foreign languages, economics... and I'm a more informed, well-rounded person because of it. I'm also a better critical thinker, and I can write coherently and express ideas (something not taken for granted these days, unfortunately). If I choose to go the academic route, the pay will pale with respect to the amount of time and effort I'll put in, and I'll be okay with that because I enjoy the subject.
Of course you're going to learn skills and knowledge that pertain to your field of interest while in college. My point is I didn't go to college to become a biologist, I went to college and came out prepared to become a biologist (hence the graduate school afterwards), and also an educated member of society. The field of biology is poised to undergo some of the biggest changes yet, and any set of skills that I'll learn today (microarrays, sequencing gels, etc.) are bound to be out of date in 20 years. Those aren't the important skills that I learned, but that's what a vocational training teaches.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
Best of both worlds.
Got a job right out of college that paid (the then) astounding salary of $25,000 a year (yes, I am pretty damn old). Never worried about work that paid on the high end of the salary curve since.
While the mathematics were primary, i devoted much of the Arts potion of my degree studying the history of Mathematics.
Balance. All things.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Over under the physical sciences section, it lists Geology & Earth Sciences and Geosciences as separate fields. At my university, geography and geology are merged under the Geosciences department, under the School of Liberal Arts. My mineralogy professor has opined this is just a scheme to get the arts people more income by not lumping geology with chemistry and biology instead, and that the Earth Sciences major is just a watered down Geology major for people not aiming for graduate school. Meanwhile, the Bureau of Labor and Statistics counts hydrology/hydrogeology and geography as separate from other geosciences for purposes of calculating income. What do Geosciences encompass?
What does the interest on the loans add up to?
What percentage actually complete the degree?
Deleted
You'd better pick up a minor in business for that grow op you're learning how to run.
I looked through the stats in the pdf, and it looks like only about 40% on average graduate.
Presumably they did however take out loans while they were studying so you have millions out there with student loan debt, but not even a degree to boost earnings.
Does indeed seem like there might be a problem.
Deleted
Oil Engineer being the top, and people helping people with brain problem the bottom. Honestly how much do you need to know to get a liquid that is under pressure to rise to the top versus figuring out the electro-chem engine known as the human brain.
Our education, jobs, and government are broken and anyone sitting there thinking this is going to right and correct itself should of spent more time in History class in college then whatever they took to think they actually understand the world.
Math is of little use. I'm the only guy in my department with a bachelors, and took all the math and physics required for any of the engineering degrees (there was only one major that required more math than I had, and it was the math major). And so, when we did new stuff, satellite and wireless, I lead the group because no one else could work their way through a wireless link budget. No one else could understand, much less calculate, a Fresnel zone. Sure, plenty of people do that stuff with no actual knowledge of the math behind it. But the math does help. As does the math when looking at the Ethernet specification and understanding why half-duplex fails just past 100m. Or when thinking about encryption.
Sure, you don't need a math and science background for IT, but it helps. It's the difference between an IT engineer and just some tech.
Learn to love Alaska
That is a terrible idea for one simple reason: in our society, 18 year-olds embarking on a university education are still children*. Young people already have a very difficult time of knowing who they are and what they want without the pressure of making money behind it. I will illustrate with an anecdote: my parents were left wingers, and they raised my sister to the mantra of "never be beholden to any man". They raised me to follow my whims. She got a law degree*, Magna cum laude, from the country's #2 law university and soon landed a great job at a high-powered firm. I bounced between majors before finishing after five years with politics, did a stint in the Army and eventually went back for an MA in the same field. Also spent a year backpacking in Latin America.
Now we are both in our 40s. She hated being a lawyer and burned out and quit after a few years. All those years of expensive, specialist training are wasted. Nowadays she pines about how she would have liked to study CS, of all things, but did not do so because she perceived that law provided better job security (she was wrong about that, it turns out). Based on the broad depth of my educative experiences, I advanced quickly in the company I finally settled into, and I make a very good living doing work that is both valuable to society (as in, I actually create wealth) and fulfilling.
That is what happens to people when people like you put pressure on kids to use money as the criteria for choosing their education. They get expensive training in a profession that they end up hating and even if they remain in their field they under-perform. This is a serious problem: how many people do you know who hate their jobs but feel stuck? I know many of them. As an adult, economic incentive combined with broad knowledge of things that actually interest you, things that you care enough about to remain current on, is enough to get you into a good job somewhere; there is no need to force kids to run after money.
*: I know that the /. crowd thinks lawyers are leaches, and they are probably right, but the point here is economic payoff versus technicality of training, and frankly it does not get much more technical than US law.
the degree has almmost NOTHING to do with those making higher salaries.They would with or without a degree in those fields.University is just an industry like any other now. You pay them to teach you what you would very well learn on your own in this day and age. you are paying for a worthless peice of paper whos worth is dwindling every year.
As a grad student in engineering that has seen nearly all his friends at the BS, MS, and PhD levels all able to find good paying, stable jobs, I had grown pretty tired of the stream of /. articles from Ivy League tenured professors of religion ranting about how our education system is all wrong.
No. You are taking proof that education pays as proof that our education system is not wrong. I'm sorry to say, but that's not how logic works. I'm the recipient of post-grad education, which IMO was really excellent. I know that it opened a lot of doors for me and has allowed me to command a very (very, but very) good salary.
But that doesn't change the fact our education system is wrong. All you have to do is take your average HS grad and ask him what the square root of 36 is, what a/b + c/d equals to. On a much less esoteric and far more practical front, what exactly our education system equips HS students with?
Our education system is wrong in that it makes no provision for vocational training at the HS level (as found in say, the German or Japanese models of education.) It also makes little provision to college-level vocational training (as in AS degrees.)
Our education systems works on the assumption that the only road for success is in getting one or more college degrees. It ignores the fact that in practice, every economy has a threshold over which it cannot absorb more college graduates. It makes no provision for building a skilled, blue collar work force.
It is absurd for a college educated person like yourself to be completely oblivious to that fact. And just because you or I have been the recipients of a good college education (and that we are bound to reap the benefits), that does not mean that is is working for society. That is not how logic (and economics for that matter) works, and you as a grad student should have (or should have had) sufficient analytical acumen to come to that realization.
Degrees where the job is in demand get better pay.
News at 11.
The problem with this argument either for or against college is that, in today's sound-bite society, it will never get the consideration it requires. There are a lot of great reasons to go to college and better pay is pretty good motivation but I went to college for better work and a more interesting career than the guys I worked with as an engineering technician. I know guys with less schooling and experience in the same field that make more money than I do. I also know folks that wish they were where I was but never took the college money that was part of our benefit package. They left the money on the table. I know a supervisor who is struggling to keep staff because the techs stay long enough to get 30 or so credits to finish the undergrad and split the department for a better job. It's all a matter of interest, what the student is there for and personal interest.
If you are in for the money alone you will have a hard time in the long run. Anyone remember the dot-com bust? Not that long ago was it? I finished anyway. I did it because I wanted to and there would be jobs out there eventually. I landed in the same field I started in; the aerospace industry. The work is well regarded, the pay is good and I get to work with some incredibly smart people every day. I won't get rich on what I make but I make quite a bit more than almost all of the hourly and non-exempt staff. My background is electronics, my degree is in Information Systems and my job is as an industrial sensors (multi-discipline) engineer. My degree was helpful in learning some of the things I have to do but it was hardly what I would think of as a vocational school. That is the other option: Go part time on a company benefit plan while working full time. Get an Associates Degree to get a job and then finish from there. It takes longer and its hard but you end up with the degree minus the debt and that can't be over stated for most of us. You don't have to slog out a degree straight through the traditional way. For those of us from middle income families that is impractical at best and stupid at worst.
I also have to admit that the general education classes I initially dreaded sort of grew on me over the course of my studies. Mythology and the Joseph Campbell books were sort of cool. Philosophy, American History, Psychology, a course in parenting with a Sociologist as the lecturer. While the core courses were the meat and potatoes of the education the general education requirements were a chance to look into things I would otherwise never have considered. By the time I was taking that stuff I had taken all of the math, physics and chemistry along with the software and hardware courses I needed for the BS degree. I still needed the general education courses and I was enjoying it by then. While I did take a few on-line courses over the years in the summers, the networking and people I met, going over the material with other adults (without multi-tasking) for a whole thee hours of so a week came to be something I looked forward to. The job I have now I owe to a course I took at UMUC in the 90's. It's only a waste if you really don't care about it and you don't expect much. If you care about the nature of both work and learning then you put more into it and get more out of it.
bob@Osprey:~>
Guys who are good, especially really creative programmers tend to be impossible to work with until they are in their mid 20s, if someone doesn't believe they are God at 19, they've probably not got the meager talent required to impress themselves and aren't going to be much good anyway.
I think you're missing out on something here. There are plenty of people who are very intelligent but who lack self-confidence, perhaps the guy/girl you're talking to was bullied throughout their younger years and has come to look at anything he/she does as simple and useless or perhaps they are merely comparing themselves to the best of the best, I know I sure did that in my teens, I didn't compare what I could create to the things my peers created, I compared it to what the "legends" of the computing world created. And when you're comparing your own little 2D game to Quake and some little utility program you just wrote to something like TeX or the Linux kernel it's easy to feel like you are completely unskilled.
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
A good engineer makes that in under 10 years.
As an English guy at the age of 19 doing a CompSci degree at the University of Leicester (1st year almost done), I can't comment on the value of the degree for the price I'm paying, and even if I could, it'd be irrelevant for people deciding in the future here as it tuition fees are going up massively soon.
That said, I am really, really enjoying my degree. The people, the course, the whole experience. Yeah, I'm sure I'd get some of that working, but it is a great thing. If I don't take massive monetary value out of my degree, in knowledge and enjoyment, I'm hoping to take a hell of a lot.
-- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
Let me state up front - if I'm a troll.......I'm a troll. I don't care - this is my experience - take it or leave it.
After 30+ years in the work force (15+ non-business/technical environment and the last 15+ in business for profit environment) I can safely say that the only degrees that will provide a significant return, from a time and money perspective, in the business world is one that involves counting beans or butt sniffing. The last several jobs (read last 15 years) I've found if you don't count beans in some form or fashion, you're at the bottom of the food chain. Likewise in the butt sniffing of one or more of the following: upper management or the customers or better yet, the bean counters. Have a technical education and go somewhere and say, "I just want to do what I like, do what I'm good at and be left out of the office politics" and POOF!, you're delegated to the dungeon.
If I had the opportunity, and I keep looking, to get back to a non-business/technical environment (where no one counts beans and butt sniffing is is rare) that pays 6 figures like my first 15 years, I'd go so fast you'd think that thunder was coming out my ass because I'm going out the door fast as lightning.
Now you kids get back in school and get off my lawn!!
Age discrimination is also a problem. What they don't tell college students is that the engineering degrees have an expiration date on them. The closer to retirement you get the less companies will even hire you. If you suffer a job loss in your late fifties your expensive degree isn't worth the paper it is printed on.
Yup. I went to community college. Spent an average of $1,500 per semester. Got some grants, some scholarships for art and math. I graduated in 1992 with no debt and a shiny AA degree (math/computer science). My first job after graduating paid $40K per year (this was in 1992). I left there, took another job after two years for $60K. I left there after 6 months, took another job for $65K. Stagnated at that pay for almost 4 years. Went to a software company that paid $80K. For the past 8 years I've been pulling in $100K on that AA degree.
My salary compared to the average tech guy who has been in the field for 20 years is absolutely average. The difference is that I didn't spend all that money on tuition and have no student loans. Some of the guys are still paying off their degrees 20 years later :O.
$15K well spent I'd say. I know I'm an outlier for a CC degree. Most in my field have bachelors or masters degrees. They're about as useless as I am.
If you sort the graph from highest median salary to lowest, you will see that the people who are care about the future generations (educators, counselors, social workers, etc) are paid the least while people (like me) that help drive our unsustainable culture are paid the most. That is not really something to be proud of.
Aren't co-dependent variables the kind that go on daytime TV shows?
Find your love in school while you are still in it. If you wait until working outside to find your other half, all you get is gold diggers.
Of course there are people who still want to go this route because it saves you money during college, but then make sure you get a pre-nuptial to protect your assets.
New Economic Perspectives
Maybe it's about time you guys start electing people who are ready to make radical changes to the education system.
In the UK the recent changes to the higher education sector have made changes to allow universities to decide on tuition fees (something I strongly disagreed with), but thankfully imposed a 9000 pound cap. Maybe you guys across the pond should consider something similar to prevent the spiralling costs? Allowing something as vital as education to be governed by greed is asking for trouble.
If you can't get work and you are highly educated why not volunteer your time in exchange for a bed, food and some life experience? Do some aid work abroad! Help out on Japan, Haiti, if you're feeling adventurous - north Africa.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
What kind of voter are you if you can't think critically, or if you don't understand politics and science? Can you manage your financial decisions without and understanding of math and business? Think about what a better neighbor, parent, and traveler you would be, if you could speak a foreign language.
Answer: an ethnocentric American Republican.
Who cares how much you make? The purpose of higher education is to attain knowledge.
High post secondary costs are the result of private sector and governments trying to keep the people ignorant and a cheap source of labor.
I'll disagree.
There's a lot of problems with the *price point* of education, but the process itself is basically one of our noblest endeavors. I'm purposely including self-taught - no one said knowledge had to be formal.
However, formal education is designed with a quasi-coherent syllabus to make you aware that there are strange new worlds of knowledge out there, and if it clicks, you'll never subscribe to the Pink Floyd "we don't need no education" mentality. Sure, specific teachers can suk, schools waste cash, whatever. But I learned tons on here, I learned tons from books, and by golly, I pay my rent from my accounting degree.
"The best way to escape from a problem is to solve it." --Alan Saporta
India is developing since you can exploit Indians via caste system.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/may/03touch.htm
China is developing since you can exploit Chinese by abusing human rights.
http://www.rediff.com/business/slide-show/slide-show-1-tech-apple-workers-forced-to-sign-no-suicide-pledge/20110504.htm
Americans are suffering since US regime is letting Chindia exploit their people via outsourcing.
US visa system/outsourcing should be linked to caste system in India and human rights in China
Globalization is exploitation unless US issues World Passport to citizens
Slashdot = Sarcasm
As I noted in some of my other posts, I believe education, including the formal variety, is very valuable. It is only the idea that formal education will pave the way to future financial success that is flawed. If your only goal is to become rich, you are wasting your time in school. I find it disconcerting that so many will defend higher education as a way to riches when there are so many other great reasons to be there that aren't based on questionable statistical interpretations and general myths. The quest for knowledge and personal betterment should be reason alone to get people into the classrooms, no?
Type of degree matters big time. My wife and I have eng degrees and have never been unemployed. We are in mid-40's. Right now I know 4 different guys with Commerce/Business degrees that are out of work. All started after Univ with jobs selling ad space, insurance, working in banks, managing sales accounts etc.. The problem is that although they know a domain - the skill set needed to do the job is just not that hard to master - and they get too expensive. Who wants the 45 yr old sales fart when you can have some new grad for half the price. Funny thing is that my wife doesn't even work as an engineer. She is in finance and does costing/contract stuff. She gets great jobs - works in technology but on the business side. They hire her because she has an Eng degree and understands what they are talking about. The generic Bcomm schmuck can only fake it.
A study performed by an educator at an educational institution, head of another organization dedicated to higher education. A man whose various jobs depend on people paying for higher education, whose entire existence revolves around higher education.
Did anyone seriously think this study would say anything BUT "get a degree"? It's like a Coke executive doing a study on whether you should drink Coke.
The right to offend is central to the right to free speech.
You have to pay to study? WTF?
United States is ridicolous, so poor people can't study? What a shit of country...
Basically make as much as someone with a Harvard degree, get paid to go to school and retire making 85% of your working income as a prison guard in CA.
No wonder CA has budget problems.....
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
you'll have fun and you won't pay as much. US Univ. do it, b/c everyone pays, would't you charge as much?
And guess what, lots of big minds out there, come from Europe and give speeches at conferences etc...
Okay - somebody has to defend the arts degrees here, and I guess I'll do it. A lot of people are looking at this in terms of technology work (hardly surprising, as this is a technology site), but a liberal arts degree is far from useless.
Take me, for example. I just finished a Master of Arts in War Studies with a history concentration. Prior to that, I got a B.A. in English literature, and prior to that, a B.A. in Medieval Studies. Where did this lead me? Contract defence research. The work I do will hopefully help my country (Canada) avoid a debacle like the United States had in Iraq between 2003-2005. No new graduate with a B.Sc. could do what I do.
Will a B.A. immediately lead to a job paying $80,000 per year? Probably not. But, it does tell an employer three very important things: you can finish what you start, you can work under pressure (depending on the reputation of the school), and you can think critically. All of these are attributes that are looked for in the senior positions. So, you may be making $30,000, or possibly less, right out the door, but you will be on the path to a much better senior position as you get more experience.
And, if you want to get ahead outside of the technology field, the liberal arts are important. Want to work in politics? A liberal arts degree will take you farther. Same with defence research, or working in developing countries. Or social work.
So, a liberal arts degree is not useless. It just doesn't lead into a technology field right after graduation.
Robert B. Marks
Author, Demonsbane in Diablo Archive
A college degree is a tool in your toolbox. Try going to work with an empty toolbox - LOL!!!
Certification is just a sexy repackaging of training and just makes you a low cost cog for some company.
Get your degree and then get a few more.
Get off your assets and work hard - for yourself!!!