Slashdot Mirror


Popular College Majors Changed Abruptly After the Financial Crisis (qz.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Ten years have passed since the 2008 financial crisis, and the effects linger. For one thing, the crisis produced a significant shift in American higher education. Scared by a seemingly treacherous labor market, since the downturn college students have turned away from the humanities and towards job-oriented degrees. It's not clear they are making the right decision. The humanities were humming along prior to 2008, according to an analysis by the Northeastern University historian Benjamin Schmidt. Over the previous decade, disciplines like history, philosophy, English literature, and religion were either growing or holding steady as a share of all college majors. But in the decade after the financial crisis, all of these majors took a nosedive. The popularity of the history major is an illustrative example. From 1998 to 2007, the share of college students graduating with a degree in history averaged around 2%. By 2017, it had fallen closer to 1%. (All data in this article are based on reports that colleges submit to the US Department of Education.) Other humanities majors saw a similar fall. "Declines have hit almost every field in the humanities... and related social sciences," wrote Schmidt in the The Atlantic. "[T]hey have not stabilized with the economic recovery, and they appear to reflect a new set of student priorities, which are being formed even before they see the inside of a college classroom."

254 comments

  1. The humanities strike back by Evtim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oooh, so that was the reason....people got wind of the uselessness of (most of) those degrees (especially the WAY they are taught), enrolment decreased, and the response of the humanities was.....the insane politicking and the march against logic, reason, knowledge, discipline, learning, critical thinking, diversity of opinion, open mindedness, freedom of thought and speech....etc.

    Figures!

    1. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      credentialing /= job training /= education

      Hardly anybody has the education to understand that, although people generally do know where the money is.

    2. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      job training = job training / education;
      credentialing = credentialing / job training;

    3. Re:The humanities strike back by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The thing I have found is that Humanities attracted the wrong type of students.
      I always though that Humanities should require up to 200 level of Math and Sciences, Just as STEM Majors are required to have up to 200 levels in Humanities. The fact that humanities are so weak in Math and Science, they attract students who are actively avoiding math and science classes. Academics who are avoiding learning material because they don't do well in the test, doesn't create good academics. If these people decide to join the workforce, it isn't their lack of Math or science skills but their lack of interest in taking on something because it is hard.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Everyone knows this because it's said in every thread on the subject anywhere on the internet.
      People go to college for careers. It may not be the role that colleges want to play but it is.

      That said there is nothing wrong with humanities and I encourage everyone with a STEM degree to walk down to their local community college and sign up for some classes. It's like watching 90s discovery channel for rich people who have STEM degrees and you can bone girls like 10 years younger than yourself, meet people with mushrooms and molly. Really it's a wonderful experience when you don't even care if you get the credits.

    5. Re:The humanities strike back by The+Original+CDR · · Score: 2

      I was an English lit and still took Calculus in college (probably because I like math). The only course I went out of my way to avoid was biology with a lab. I managed to convince a counselor that Electronics 101 satisifed the science with lab requirement. Being an English lit didn't prevent me from starting my technical career in Silicon Valley.

    6. Re:The humanities strike back by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We need the humanities, but prior to the financial crisis it seemed to me that it was already widely accepted that we had far more graduates in those fields than we needed, and that the vast majority of them were thus incapable of putting their degree to good use. While enrollment may be half of what it was prior to the crisis, that doesn't necessarily mean there's a problem. If anything, I'm inclined to think that the market has corrected itself and that today's supply of graduates is closer to actual demand for people in those fields.

    7. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My first computer teacher was the school's drama teacher. He was also the last computer teacher, as none had anything to teach after that, and I ended up in the physical sciences and a career in numerical computing. If you had an interest in science or engineering, the degree doesn't matter that much. If you didn't have an interest, no degree should even be possible. It is though in the humanities, which makes the bulk of their product so useless and insufferable.

    8. Re:The humanities strike back by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, the humanities!

      (sorry, I know, bad pun... but when do you get to say it?)

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You hit the proverbial nail on the head, with one caveat: the wrong type of student is what entered college to begin with, if this is the common behavior. And it is.

      The fact that STEM course avoidance due to difficulty is a thing that exists in college, is very telling of America, just how much society loathes, actual intelligence and an educated populace. / casual American here...

      The often uttered "I'll never use this" in real life from my peers, was something I could only shake my head at. As if they know what fate awaits them for this life...

      Chance does favor the prepared mind! It astonishes me that sentiment gets lost on so many people.

    10. Re:The humanities strike back by saltydogdesign · · Score: 2

      Given the implicit advocacy of STEM in this reply, the absence of any concrete support for the author's thesis is rather remarkable.

      --
      // This is not a sig.
    11. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, that means we can't run the meme that those darn millennial kids were dumb and studied useless degrees.

      Quick wiki says millennial generation are born around 1980 to 2000. So those born earlier may have graduated with "useless degrees" by 2008, but the later ones would be the ones who switched after the crisis

    12. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have four years of solid math and physics. I barely use addition and subtraction in my daily job.

    13. Re:The humanities strike back by Moof123 · · Score: 1

      Left out is a comparison of income growth and unemployment rate by degree track. Have those majors seen a huge salary run-up relative to college averages due to this new scarcity? Are key English and History jobs going unfilled? I suspect the answers are No and No, or the article would have headlined with those claims.

      The exploding cost of higher education should be a real guy check for students and parents as so whether a desired degree track is worth the money/debt and if it will ever pay off. I believe for many the answer is becoming and emphatic "No".

      Computer Science shows very strong growth, Engineering shows modest growth. Given where the economy has been going for the last few decades I would argue that the trends are right in-line with the work force aligning itself with the job opportunities.

    14. Re:The humanities strike back by neurojab · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We need the humanities, but prior to the financial crisis it seemed to me that it was already widely accepted that we had far more graduates in those fields than we needed, and that the vast majority of them were thus incapable of putting their degree to good use. While enrollment may be half of what it was prior to the crisis, that doesn't necessarily mean there's a problem. If anything, I'm inclined to think that the market has corrected itself and that today's supply of graduates is closer to actual demand for people in those fields.

      Exactly. To add to this: There used to be (and still is) in some circles a saying that "A liberal arts education prepares you for any job", meaning that if you major in art history for example you can get a great job in banking. I think that while it's true that studying any field in depth can help you in any other field, the reality is that the world is more specialized now. Due to better communication, everyone is now affected by global competition to some degree, and, as a result of this, people are now more than ever expected to actually have skills in the field they work in. I think student expectations have also changed. Why spend 4 years studying art history when you have almost no chance of getting a job in that field, whereas if you study a field that has good job prospects, you'll be at an advantage compared to everyone without that degree. It's just practicality.

    15. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leave it to the humanities grad to say nothing relevant so eloquently.

      You must be a hoot at parties.

    16. Re:The humanities strike back by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A Proper education needs Humanities and STEM.
      I went to college before STEM was a thing, it was just Computer Science, which was part of the Math and Physics department.
      But that is what I saw. For my "STEM" Major I needed to take courses including 200 level Humanity classes. Covering History, Literature, Politics, Arts, Sociology, Philosophy and Psychology. The college wisely determined that Technology Majors should have a diverse education.
      However humanity majors needed to retake High school Algebra if they didn't already have taken it. And a class in "Science" which was a humanity like class explaining science. This really gave them a disservice in their education.
      However the argument seemed to go like this.
      Them: Not everyone is good at Math and Science so they shouldn't have to take these classes which will only hurt their GPA.
      Me: I am not good at Humanity classes, and they are hurting my GPA, why can't I skip them?
      Them: Because these classes are valuable to education.
      Me: Isn't Math and Science valuale to education
      Them: Yes, but not a lot of people are good at it.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    17. Re:The humanities strike back by krygny · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe they want to learn some skills for which someone would be willing to pay them. So's they can put their six-figure debt behind them and start life before they're 40. Not that a rich and broadly diverse education doesn't have value, in and of itself, but with a little sweat equity, it can be gotten for no money down. These are usually referred to as personal interests or pursuits, not marketable skills. The world has just gotten lousy with psychologists, sociologist and "journalists". GEEZ, everybody is fucking journalist, in case you haven't noticed.

      Of course, it's not easy. In STEM, there is generally only one right answer to any problem. Most of the rest are wrong. Under the softer "sciences", there are almost no wrong answers. Unless the professor doesn't like it. So, don't pick that answer.

      --
      Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
    18. Re:The humanities strike back by magarity · · Score: 0

      The fact that STEM course avoidance due to difficulty is a thing that exists in college, is very telling of America, just how much society loathes, actual intelligence and an educated populace

      And yet liberal arts majors are the first to peer down their noses with intellectual superiority.

    19. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many contemporary humanities students/professors are intellectually lazy, which is funny considering the heritage of many canonical authors and the like.

      I graduated from a liberal UC w/ a BA in English Lit. I think I had 1 TA total who would openly disagree with students' interpretations of works; all others would say "that's an interesting interpretation" or something with a similar positive flavor. There was practically 0 debate.

      I entered the job force as a tech writer.

    20. Re:The humanities strike back by plopez · · Score: 2

      I can't see foreign languages as useless

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    21. Re:The humanities strike back by skam240 · · Score: 1

      "the insane politicking and the march against logic, reason, knowledge, discipline, learning, critical thinking, diversity of opinion, open mindedness, freedom of thought and speech....etc."

      You mean like your post which features the insane politicking of an article about enrollment numbers for the humanities?

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    22. Re:The humanities strike back by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Good universities require a broad level of education to graduate - you may major in one subject but are still required to learn many diverse subjects. But too many places tend to be too tightly focused, bending to the students' desires to not "waste time" on stuff they're not interested in. Some of these universities just seem like overpriced trade schools. I think some of this came about because some engineering majors have so many prerequisites and courses that they're already a 5 year degree without counting in the breadth requirements.

      So engineering students should most definitely learn writing.
      Writing students should learn math and science.
      Everyone should learn political science.

      Divide it up into three spheres; math/science, arts, and social sciences. Then everyone should be dabbling into all three of those.

    23. Re:The humanities strike back by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Hmm, when I was in high school I took bio and advanced bio. But then the University of California did not accept those classes as a "science" (chemistry and physics only), so I had to squeeze another class in as a senior.

    24. Re:The humanities strike back by HyperQuantum · · Score: 1

      Your username seems to be quite appropriate.

      --
      I am not really here right now.
    25. Re:The humanities strike back by ole_timer · · Score: 1

      that's true as long as you have good teachers - most are losers so they turn out educated losers...

      --
      nothing to see here - move along
    26. Re:The humanities strike back by Dragonslicer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And yet liberal arts majors are the first to peer down their noses with intellectual superiority.

      You must be new here.

    27. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being an English lit didn't prevent me from starting my technical career in Silicon Valley.

      You're a prime example of why the humanities losing enrollment and technical fields gaining enrollment is a good thing.

    28. Re:The humanities strike back by Kjella · · Score: 0

      A Proper education needs Humanities and STEM.

      When you say it like that - particularly with the capitalization - I get the image of English aristocrats nipping tea and complaining how everyone who hasn't suffered through Latin is just a country bumpkin. It was probably a good idea when the highly educated were the teachers, doctors and priests while most everyone else were farmers or craftsmen so they had to cover a broad range of subjects. Today we need specialists, lots and lots of specialists. I don't need my neurosurgeon to have university-level education in "History, Literature, Politics, Arts, Sociology, Philosophy and Psychology" I need a damn good surgeon and honestly I couldn't care if he has the social skills of Dr. Stephen Strange either.

      From first grade to my master's degree I had 17 years of education. I really don't think 12 years as a generalist and 5 years as a specialist is too much. There is plenty I had to learn and plenty more I could have learned in my field of study, of course we also need cross-overs so the specialists talk to each other but we don't need Renaissance men like Leonardo da Vinci trying to cover everything from anatomy to airplanes. If you want to be an aerospace engineer for SpaceX that's cool but it'll probably take most your education and work experience to get there. There's so many giants standing on the shoulders of other giants it takes a good while just to learn what others have learned before you.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    29. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet liberal arts majors are the first to peer down their noses with intellectual superiority.

      You must be new here.

      Really? Have you ever seen STEM majors bragging "oh I don't read any books" the way humanities majors brag about not being able to solve a simple quadratic equation?

    30. Re:The humanities strike back by apoc.famine · · Score: 2

      I concur. I got a lot out of an Egyptian history class, and although I'm shit at art, I really appreciated taking a pottery class. Exposure to things outside your comfort zone is really a good thing. It helps you understand how big the world is, and how specialized people can be in areas you don't even know exit.

      The undergraduate college I went to actually required humanities to take STEM coursework. The popular science classes were "Rocks for Jocks" and Astronomy. Both were somewhat dumbed down and simplified to the point that the professors were really not happy with them. But that was a political decision to make sure that enough humanities students graduated every year.

      I guess it's better than what you're describing, because they at least got exposure to a broader world rather than getting to skip it. But I definitely had to take a ton more humanities than they had to take STEM classes.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    31. Re:The humanities strike back by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      In this instance, I believe the word 'liberal' has changed its meaning. 'Liberal' used to mean 'a wide variety of' - so 'liberal arts' included literature, mathematics, philosophy, various sciences, etc. Medicine? Medicine is an art, so yeah, one could even argue that. Now it seems to mean 'something that does not require intellectual rigor.' Unfortunate because the study of philosophy SHOULD require this. Ditto for literature, history, creative writing, etc. How can you be a good writer without a good grasp of language and ideas? Just amazing.

    32. Re:The humanities strike back by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Good universities require a broad level of education to graduate.

      This is done to soak you for a plethora of classes which will never be of any use to you. It is not for your benefit.

      Everyone should learn political science.

      No. Everyone should not be indoctrinated.

    33. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liberal used to mean "for a free person" as opposed to "for a slave." In ancient Athens, no man worked for another for a wage: there were independent artisans, craftsmen, farmers, and so forth, and there were the slaves of those artisans. The idea of working as an employee in a shop was alien--the "employees" as they would be called today were all slaves. Labor didn't get time off, so it did not have much need for the liberal arts. The owners, who could enjoy free time, who could be free from work -- they were the ones who cultivated the liberal arts, especially those rich enough not to need to work at all. They were the ones who could afford the time to debate about politics, to write, to cultivate the arts.
      Basically, the liberal arts are for executives and the wealthy. They were never intended to help you get a job, and in fact were the exact opposite of what should help you get a job.

    34. Re:The humanities strike back by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Oh, yes. I once went to a "Introduction to formal logic" class for students of philosophy, and it was utterly pathetic. The lecturer was clueless. The students were clueless. They needed 2 months to finish propositional logic and that was without any actual real use of the stuff. In CS, we basically did that in a week and then a couple more weeks for simplification, modelling stuff, model-checking, tautology checks, all with complexity proofs, etc. To add insult to injury, that was an elective course in philosophy, were of course the CS course was mandatory and covered other stuff as well.

      Now, don't get me wrong. Philosophy done right is really hard. But it seems it is not taught that way today at all. My CS course was.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    35. Re: The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you didn't understand what they said, your STEM education failed you.

    36. Re:The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This tired old argument "If you're so into science you need to provide scientific evidence!"
      You only need to be a college graduated human being (without autism) to be well aware that sometimes people fail basic college mathematics and when they do those who have no particular career path in mind will then dodge those classes in the future.

      This is a man making an unremarkable claim in an interned discussion
      I don't need to provide a citation, experiment, thesis, evidence, mathematical proof, or even logical argument. Transforming the internet into courtrooms, thesis committees and scientific reviews every time someone doesn't like what's being aired .

      You can go stand over in the corner with all the religious nutbags, republicans, anti-vaxers, SJWs, etc that try to turn everything into an academic debate. I don't bother arguing with homeless people when they tell me they're jesus even though I have no proof. It's a waste of my time.

    37. Re: The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is done because people who don't do it wind up being educated morons. There's all sorts of people out there that are completely worthless outside of a tiny area of mere competence.

      The breadth requirements exist to help mitigate that problem.

    38. Re: The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love watching American infighting. Bodes well for the prospects of those of us in the real world... :)

    39. Re: The humanities strike back by firbolgar · · Score: 2

      Here's a better idea ... make those studying humanities take the in-major STEM classes, not the watered down version. What they gain is less the knowledge of the course but more new ways of thinking. One does not get that in "rocks for jocks". If the in-najor STEM classes are too hard, perhaps the problem is with what they're being compared to ... perhaps it's the in-major humanities courses which are not rigorous enough?

    40. Re: The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The STEM equivalent is being a libertarian. Just look around at all the morons here that think Ayn Rand was a brilliant model to pattern one's life after and tell me those folks studied the humanities,

    41. Re: The humanities strike back by makerfixer · · Score: 1

      Ask Venezuela how not reading and appreciating Ayn Rand turns out... or just cater to government clients at work for a year...

    42. Re: The humanities strike back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Get help, you are having a stroke.

    43. Re:The humanities strike back by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      If colleges paid the math/engineering profs the same as they paid the english/history profs, then I'd say a lit degree is as worthwhile as a STEM degree.

      However, if you take into account basic economics, the college degree costs you the same tuition per hour period. Therefore, as a student, why not take the easy classes?

      Why not? Because the _value_ of the degrees are different. Colleges should charge different amounts of money for different degrees and that would shove the value of the classes into a student's face in an Adam Smith kind of way.

  2. Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would one take over $100k in loans for career that pays a little more than minimum wage or twice the minimum wage? Some schools tuition is $30k a semester, which is even harder to grasp that kind if debt with such a low salary.

    1. Re: Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Humanities pays almost as much as science (not computer science). Why would anyone pay $30k/year for any degree? It really only makes sense if you're going into a highly lucrative career such as finance or becoming a doctor or lawyer. Even then, it's tough to argue it needs to be so expensive.

    2. Re: Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by The+Original+CDR · · Score: 1

      Except a "highly lucrative career" doesn't always panned out. A friend spent $64K per year for four years to send his daughter to NYU to become a Broadway star. While she had minor roles in off Broadway productions during the summers, she never landed a role after graduation. She came back to home to work at Staples while working for free in local productions. She will be a star — someday.

    3. Re: Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by nealric · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The plural of anecdote is not data. However, I will share my counter example. I paid $35k a year for a philosophy degree back when that was about as expensive as schools got. Then went to law school, got a masters in tax law, and started at a six-figure job right after graduation during the worst part of the recession. Yes, it was very expensive ~$200k all in, but I paid my loans back within 5 years. I wouldn't change a thing.

      The problem is not majoring in humanities- it's going to school with no particular interest or plan for what you will do afterwards. I know people who majored in hard science and struggled afterwards. There's not much you can do with a B.S. in biology or physics career-wise, but nobody jokes about the uselessness of a biology degree. If you want to major in those subjects, you need a plan for what you will do afterwards.

    4. Re:Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Expecting to get a job because you have bought something is a gamble that you're on the hook for. It's rational to think that if your end goal is a job then you should match the education to the job requirements as best you can. My argument is that if you're an English Lit Major in IT you probably didn't need the degree in the first place.

    5. Re: Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by neurojab · · Score: 1

      Except a "highly lucrative career" doesn't always panned out. A friend spent $64K per year for four years to send his daughter to NYU to become a Broadway star. While she had minor roles in off Broadway productions during the summers, she never landed a role after graduation. She came back to home to work at Staples while working for free in local productions. She will be a star — someday.

      A degree in the arts does not make you a more in-demand artist, or give you a leg up against other artists that have learned their trade on their own. It's a hard lesson to learn - it should probably be a disclaimer that every art student should sign.

    6. Re: Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ex-husband had a plan...of sorts. He got a Masters in Biology and Philosophy and at the last PhD moment, decided he didn't want to spend most of his time begging for research grants. He then taught at a private high school for 3 years and was remarkably good at it. When it was suggested to him that he COULD go to law school at become a patent attorney, he did so. I paid for it. He is still doing so for a new wife and her two daughters. Still has his undergrad degree loans though.

      There IS much one can do with those science degrees, but one had better put much thought into it. Teach? Research? Law? Politics?

      The world is your oyster if you can figure out how you wish to parlay your education and experience into relevant contribution.

    7. Re: Maybe itâ(TM)s the cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The key is you didn't end with a philosophy degree. You immediately went on to get a professional degree -- law -- and that is how you made your money. Your philosophy degree is irrelevant.

      You're not arguing your point very well--odd for a lawyer.

  3. Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 2

    No one is going to bail out a history teacher.

    1. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by DalM · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should look into an institution known as "Tenure".

    2. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      perhaps you should check out the fact the "tenure is dying", the percent of tenured professors has taken a nose-dive.

      College is big business, high paid employees are bad for the bottom line.

    3. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 2

      After the 2008 financial crisis, how many bankers got bailed out and how many professors did?

    4. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      mandatory subject in public schools, can make 6-figures and retire early with no performance review

    5. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by DalM · · Score: 1

      "...with no performance review",

      said someone online that clearly has no idea what they are talking about at all.

    6. Re: Everyone wants a golden parachute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      That's why they join Antifa. They get frustrated and blame others.

    7. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um..... Banks are equal to universities now?
      So, when a private money lending corporation which exists solely to make money for its shareholders collapses and shaves off a few of it top-tier jobs, that's exactly the same as a university cutting programs?
      Huh. Learn something new every day.

    8. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      If you are having trouble following a train of thought maybe you should have stayed at the station.
      Did you miss the bit in the heading of the article about the financial crisis?
      And again in the summary?
      And again in the post you replied to?

      Learn something new every day.

      I doubt that you do.

    9. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      Is that 6 figures a day? Or only per week?
      Banks got bailed out Billions, each.

    10. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      No one is going to bail out a history teacher.

      Probably one of the most important course(s) a student will ever take. Pay and value are not necessarily the same. "Mob rule" democracies, demagogues, ethnic cleansing, wars gone sour, etc. are all scenarios that have played out in history and we may be repeating.

      My high school buddy wanted to be a history teacher. He loved pontificating about history, and especially WWII. But he faced the reality that money and opportunity were better as a math teacher, and thus got a STEM degree. He may someday turn to teaching history when he feels financially stable.

    11. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      No doubt you are at least partly right. I was attempting to explain the choices people made after the financial crisis. Not really judging the merits of those decisions.

    12. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by mikael · · Score: 1

      If someone is a top tier professor who runs his/her own large research group, can get the research grants rolling in, and has at least eight or more research students (1 post-doc student = £120,000 in revenue to the university), that individual is worth mega-bucks to the university.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    13. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      And when those professors fuck up royally, bankrupt their University and almost bring the entire economy to the brink of collapse. How many Trillions of dollars will the government pay to bail them out and make sure they can keep their bonuses?

    14. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      the difference is that those R&D profs actually bring in far more money to the university than they costs. At CSU, we had multiple buildings buily bu professors that got funding not only for their own work, but for the extensions to buildings. So, no, these profs are not the issues with universities.
      Not sure why you think that American universities operate like your Chinese ones. The fact is, that in America, it is the teaching profs that costs universities loads of money. They are the ones that rarely bring in enough students and no real research money, to pay for their massive salaries.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    15. Re:Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      Don't bother to jump in at the end and try to troll me. When you clearly don't even understand what we are talking about Windy.

    16. Re: Everyone wants a golden parachute by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Actually, I did. You obviously do not know the university system, except in China.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    17. Re: Everyone wants a golden parachute by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't even know the topic, and jumped in with your troll.
      Read the heading of the story and start again from there. Baby steps Windy.

  4. Color me shocked by Vermonter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So degrees that were never big money makers in the first place are now huge financial losses since the economy has taken a hit, so people are avoiding them?

    >It's not clear they are making the right decision.

    I mean, if by "right decision" you mean "not bankrupting themselves", then I'd say it's quite obvious they are making the right decision to skip out on these humanities degrees.

    1. Re:Color me shocked by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the financial crisis highlighted to a lot of people that maybe they are not in the right financial class to be pursuing degrees with little to no market value. I wouldn't call the liberal arts "useless" in a greater metaphysical sense, I like art, I like a good story, I appreciate skillful use of language, and good poetry speaks to the soul. But except for a very small number of people who possess great talent, it is difficult to monetize the degree; it remains primarily a way of expanding your knowledge, it is primarily a luxury. That and a dime won't buy you coffee.

      So for the largest portion of population they are seeing college degrees in the liberal arts in the same way that most of us look at athletics: something to pursue if you are born with the right genes and you spend your entire life maximizing that potential. If you do not, you won't make it.

      Once upon a time universities were primarily for the very rich, with a few of the less wealthy brought in because their tremendous talent was recognized. The idle wealthy were basically paying the way for a few very gifted people. In the past 50 years, that has changed and most people can find a way to attend a university if they want to, but they need the degree they earn to pay for it, and to acquire a career that justifies the time. They basically cannot afford a luxury, they need to make an investment in their future. No sane person would argue that a humanities degree is a good investment in the future.

      I'm not sure this story is really all that exciting, except to a marketing dweeb to see where cultural changes are redirecting money.

    2. Re:Color me shocked by El+Cubano · · Score: 1

      You said it.

      I will add to that. I think that there is a general cultural/societal idea that nearly every young person perceives that screams to them "thou shalt attend college." I was fortunate in that I wanted to be a rocket scientist from the time I saw my first space shuttle launch and then decided a few years later that I wanted to be a computer engineer. I became a computer engineer and have thoroughly loved it.

      In my case my own career aspirations meshed well with the push to go to college. However, I teach comp sci/eng now and I see plenty of students around school who clearly have no idea what they are doing there (even in the comp sci program). They have no career aspiration and are there because mom and dad said they needed to be there and so did the rest of the world. However, there are lots more of those type in the humanities.

      The ones who "randomly" pick CS at least have descent career prospects out of the gate (even if it was not a lifelong career aspiration). But the ones that graduate with English or History or whatever degrees that don't know what they want to do with their careers are at a real disadvantage.

      I am curious if the decline in humanities correlates to an increase in STEM, people going to skilled trades, or something else. I wonder that because the schools around where I teach are all seeing declining enrollment across the board (though I don't know what the numbers look like by field of study.

    3. Re:Color me shocked by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that there's a difference between "the arts" of literature, music, and visual art, and the "liberal arts" or "soft sciences".

      Things like writing fiction, music, and painting depend more on talent than on university education. I knew plenty of music majors in college, but most of them were doing music education. For the music performance majors, you had to already be a good musician to get into the program, and it was more about the practice time and opportunity to get lessons from a trained, more experienced musician. Professional writers, musicians, and artists would probably be just as good at their jobs with 2-3 years of focused training as they are with a 4-year college degree.

      Other "liberal arts" are more like physical sciences and engineering, where natural talent certainly helps, but you typically need the education to be more than below average at your job. Some of these fields are far more important than Slashdot-types recognize. Considering politics in most countries these days, we could use more education in history. With the large number of people suffering from mental health issues, we need more psychologists and social workers. These are the kinds of fields that shouldn't just be for the idle rich, but are necessary for a modern society to not suck.

  5. Does this surprise anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    College is expensive. Students want jobs that will pay off their student loans.

    There were more and more stories of people who got humanities degrees being worse off financially than if they got no degree at all. The economy is only one factor; the price of college is the major other factor.

    1. Re:Does this surprise anyone? by dszd0g · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Instead, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, students seem to have shifted their view of what they should be studying—in a largely misguided effort to enhance their chances on the job market."
      "Students aren’t fleeing degrees with poor job prospects. They’re fleeing humanities and related fields specifically because they think they have poor job prospects."
      "If the whole story were a market response to student debt and the Great Recession, students would have read the 2011 census report numbering psychology and communications among the fields with the lowest median earnings and fled from them. Or they would have noticed that biology majors make less than the average college graduate, and favored the physical sciences. Most 18-year-olds are not econometricians, and those that are were probably going to major in economics anyway."
      "But most of the differences are slight—well within the margins of error of the surveys."

      I think this is where Schmidt really messes up. Maybe some students are still not avoiding some of the bad economic choices, but I think after story after story of people who go bankrupt from choosing the wrong college degree and suffering from the college debts and being worse off financially than if they had gotten no degree at all, I think students listened to those stories.

      "The top-paying college majors earn $3.4 million more than the lowest-paying majors over a lifetime."
      Source:
      https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew...

      • 1 Computer Science
      • 2 Engineering
      • 18 Arts
      • 19 Graphic Design
      • 20 History
      • 21 English
      • 22 Social Services

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/s...

      Millions of dollars seems more than a "slight" difference to me.

      Schmidt left off a few important graphs: 1) The decline of humanities compared to the cost of college over time. 2) The average income by degree.

      --
      This message is encrypted with Quad ROT-13 to protect the author's copyright under the DMCA.
  6. Also because employers care by DalM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There was a time (you know, back in the baby boomer days) when having a college degree was meaningful. It really didn't matter what the major was. Employers saw a degree and found that to be indicative of a good potential employee.

    Today, college degrees aren't meaningless, they are a minimum expectation. Few
    entry level white color jobs don't have a college degree as a minimum requirement to even get your application a set of eyes. But it's not even just the degree anymore. Entry level job postings will require a degree in a related field. That typically nixes humanities. So, parents and high school councilors know this and discourage studying humanities.

    Honestly, I would discourage my children from studying humanities too.

    1. Re:Also because employers care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What they've become is the new high school diploma, if it's in a related field consider it a diploma from a vo-tech school.

    2. Re:Also because employers care by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Today, college degrees aren't meaningless, they are a minimum expectation. Few entry level white color jobs don't have a college degree as a minimum requirement to even get your application a set of eyes.

      Good reason for college education to be available for free, unless you can convince a majority of employers to drop the requirement. It's the reason that public education goes through high school; at the time, a high school diploma was considered the minimum for a routine office job.

  7. Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by m00sh · · Score: 1

    College costs have been rising and is expected to be financed by student loans. Student loans are now mostly private with up to 8% in interest rates.

    It makes no financial sense to get yourself in $40,000-$50,000 in debt to get a humanities degree. Doing this will actually decrease your earnings as you have to make payments with 8% interest rates.

    You can get the same knowledge with MOOCs.

    Those majors are only for the independently wealthy now, not for the average person.

    1. Re:Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by DalM · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As yet, MOOCs are valueless to students. The value of a college degree is still wrapped into the pedigree of the college it's received from. That may be completely unfair, but it's true. If I'm an employer and I see a student with a degree from the University of Texas and one with a degree from Online Southern Highlands Institute of Technology, all else being equal, I'm going with the Longhorn. Every time. Why? Is there any indication that the UT grad worked harder? Not necessarily. But I know UT and their pedigree. I don't know OSHIT.

    2. Re:Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Student loans are now mostly private with up to 8% in interest rates.

      You're completely, staggeringly wrong with this assertion. Federal loans dwarf private loans by two orders of magnitude.

      https://studentloans.net/student-loan-debt-statistics/
      National Non-Federal Student Loan Debt - $11.6 billion
      Federal Direct Loans - $1,017 billion

    3. Re:Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is difficult at best now for a white bread blonde, as most of the Freshman class of students for the past three years are chinese. They pay higher tuition rates. Hook 'em horns!

    4. Re:Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by ole_timer · · Score: 1

      it would be nice to see some sort of breakdown on what those loans paid for - humanities or stem or business?

      --
      nothing to see here - move along
    5. Re:Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UT showed up for class.

      Assuming OSHIT is accredited (has trustworthy oversite), you get someone who has proven to be a reliable self-starter, has personal discipline, and a capability to self-teach.

    6. Re:Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Um, there are no accredited "schools" offering MOOCs (or rather, it's not part of their credit offering, since MIT has some MOOCs, but they don't count for anything).

      Even University of Phoenix isn't offering MOOCs; they are offering proper online classes.

  8. well duh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope no one is surprised at this.

  9. Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Silicon Valley, Redmond and Cupertino have been pushing STEM for the past decade. Now schools are getting chromebooks, tablets and other technology free or very cheaply from the same corps to try to "start 'em young" in the MS, Apple, or Google ecosystem. No denying math and science are important for everyone to understand. Our schools start emphasizing one set of subjects over others, and kids catch on to that.

    It also helps that science and technology have that "ooohhh shiny" screen-based appeal, while most History and Humanities subjects are in bound paper. As a 7 year old, which would you rather do? Play games on a tablet that teach you numbers? or read a book about some guy that did something?

    Once they can marry things like psychology, history, and social sciences with technology a bit better (make them appealing to kids), then the tide will turn.

  10. Where's the data on income and employment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article provides data on the decline in humanities majors, but no data on income levels between graduates with different degrees. Only "As Schmidt points out, humanities majors don’t make much less than people who choose to study computer science and finance". How much less? Where's your source of data? None is provided. With the focus of the article on the decision and economics, you'd think that perhaps money and the economy might just take a stronger role here. The author obviously didn't care about that.

    And quite a lot of FUD with "Also, if the tech bubble bursts, computer science may even be riskier than a humanities degree, which gives graduates a broader set of knowledge."

    So wait.. there's a tech bubble? I haven't heard this, and the article author offers no evidence that it exists. Also, after the dot-com bomb I didn't hear about a massive unemployment problem in the tech sector. This is just FUD. I bet Dan Kopf studied pure humanities.

    This article is just pure nonsense. People chose more practical majors after the recession. Makes sense to me.

    1. Re:Where's the data on income and employment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So wait.. there's a tech bubble?

      There is an IT employee bubble, which kind of sucks. People have been signing up in droves over the last 20 years to learn "programming" or "IT" and hope to get the quick cash that they've heard tell of from the booms of the 80's and 90's. Unfortunately, that's causing a glut, and middle managers are hiring the cheapest they can find, which means less quality. There will never be a bursting of this bubble because the low quality IT workers will just be shifted around between companies until their generation retires, so the bubble will shrink to fit instead of pop.

      captcha:erasable

  11. Finally! by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The popularity of the history major is an illustrative example. From 1998 to 2007, the share of college students graduating with a degree in history averaged around 2%. By 2017, it had fallen closer to 1%

    Woohoo! I'm a 1%er!

    Honestly though, I studied history because I enjoyed it and it was incredibly easy for me. I always planned to go to grad school afterwards to get myself a more marketable degree.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Marketable indeed... History is awesome and fascinating to learn about. The problem is just that the nation does not need all that many history majors. We need to stock the museums with 'em, and some doing research and such, but we were probably over-producing them for a long time.

      When you look around, the world is shaped by science and engineering. You get in your car, designed by engineers, and drive to work where you log onto a computer designed by engineers, and take a phone call on your GPS (designed by engineers) equipped cell phone, designed by yet more engineers, and upon getting home you toss the meat you bought at the store into your freezer, designed by even more engineers. It's only natural at some level that the STEM fields are going to have much more demand.

      That's not to take away from how fascinating history is, though, or that it's important for people to learn about to try to avoid repeating the worst of its mistakes.

    2. Re:Finally! by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wait, so how did the story end? Are you posting this from inside a dumpster behind a McDonald's with free WiFi, or what?

    3. Re:Finally! by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      We only need so many historians. But history as a BA is an effective means of learning practical critical thinking skills, outside of the STEM fields.

      What does a history student actually do? A bit simplified, it goes like:
      Read a bunch of information about a topic
      Consider previous analyses about topic
      Form a reasonable theory
      Create arguments to support the theory and back that with historical evidence/citations
      Anticipate the main counterarguments, and counter argue with evidence

      The are reasons so many future lawyers got a degree in history -- the basic methodology of legal argument and a history paper are very similar (with law having a higher level of precision, hopefully).

    4. Re:Finally! by blindseer · · Score: 1

      History is fascinating and as an engineering student I took courses on the history of engineering. We must learn our history or, as the saying goes and you point out, repeat our mistakes.

      Here's another thing I picked up in engineering, most every course I took in math and engineering was basically a history course. We started out the semester with what people knew since (picking a date somewhat randomly) perhaps the 1850s. People building bridges, firing cannons, or whatever else, figured out patterns and wrote them down. Then in about 1910 they figured out more stuff. In 1950 or so they learned more and wrote it down. And so on and so on. Each passing week of the course was an additional layer of complexity built on what we learned before, just as people in the past learned based on what was known before. I found the best instructors will point out the when and who of history while teaching. It takes little time in class to point this out but adds much in value and context.

      I don't believe that majoring in history is a bad thing but I do believe that students must go into it with an occupation in mind. History on it's own might get someone a job teaching it but that's a very limited occupation. I'll see a lot of politicians that studied history in college and I sometimes wonder if this is just a way for them to say they went to college in their future political career or they studied history to be an effective leader and representative of the people. That's not saying both can't be true, but studying things like medicine, accounting, statistics and so on can just as easily prepare someone to be a good politician, as well as allow for an occupation outside of politics.

      I had this discussion with my music instructor. I asked out of pure curiosity what he intended to do with his masters in music. He at first avoided answering the question. I later realized that he didn't think of that too much or he didn't have an answer. Later on he made mention of finding a job (or at least the high likelihood of it) as a professional performer in an orchestra and as a private instructor. We don't need too many music majors but they are important to teach music to the engineers that build the stuff we enjoy, like the auditorium that my music instructor is likely performing in right now.

      When things are going well people can find work majoring in music and history because people will pay for this as a leisure activity. When things are not so well then people will still need accountants, engineers, physicians, lawyers, and so on. A college education used to be a leisure activity for the wealthy, and in many cases people might be best served to avoid the luxury of a college degree, especially when times are tough.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  12. Seems pretty clear to me by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not clear they are making the right decision

    How is it not clear that.a bunch of people turning away from History to study something they can use to get a job is the right choice?

    Sure history is important, but not to the degree that we need a TON of history majors.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      It's not clear they are making the right decision

      How is it not clear that.a bunch of people turning away from History to study something they can use to get a job is the right choice?

      Maybe the fact that people have seemed to have forgotten what happened the last time nationalism, populism, and authoritarianism surged in popularity about 80 years ago....

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by DalM · · Score: 1

      80 years ago was hardly the last time that happened. Nationalism has more like a 15 year cycle.

    3. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Germany got out of a massive depression caused by the French after WW1?
      Then the socialists/statists took over and began genocide?

      No we haven't forgotten that leftists are stating that anyone who disagrees with AGW should be marched into a death camp and be killed. That is how we got Trump instead, who just tweets instead of sending the CIA to spy on journalists and their parents like Obama did, or like when he ordered the killing of US citizens by drone strike without any trial.

      No, it appears we remember.

    4. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by jythie · · Score: 1

      I think CS would work better as a field if we had more history majors in it, or at least history minors. STEM and business tend to suffer a lot of tunnel vision and have shocking, almost fetishized unawareness of anything that happened before they were in school, leading to significant waste.

    5. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by imperious_rex · · Score: 1

      You say nationalism and populism like they're bad things. Carried to the extreme, like you're implying, they can be. But in moderation, both can good for raising the national morale and having a leadership that is more responsive to the desires of the people.

    6. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe the fact that people have seemed to have forgotten what happened the last time nationalism, populism, and authoritarianism surged in popularity about 80 years ago....

      It seems like the people who didn't get history majors in school remember that quite well, currently it's the history majors out wearing all black with faces covered, destroying property and basically doing bad brownshirt cosplay.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    7. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by N1AK · · Score: 1

      To be fair to the person you are responding to, the way the summary is written is pretty clearly about them making the right choice personally not the right choice for us as a society. I'm happy to argue the case for more humanities and the benefits they bring, but that doesn't mean that someone making a personal decision to go for a more reliably lucrative degree isn't making the 'right decision' for themselves.

    8. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      You say nationalism and populism like they're bad things. Carried to the extreme, like you're implying, they can be. But in moderation, both can good for raising the national morale and having a leadership that is more responsive to the desires of the people.

      Sure, small doses is fine, but when does it ever stop at small doses?

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    9. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, about 15 years ago in the U.S., there was: the Iraq war which was a major distraction away from the war in Afghanistan.
      There were definitely very bad consequences from that. If future historians were to research the early part of the 21st century in order to explain why the U.S collapsed as a major power and took down the International system with it, this would probably be a major explanation as to why.

      Not that you were saying "...and nothing bad happened...", I just thought I would add it.

    10. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry about replying to my own message. I was going to say that the study of history is very useful in avoiding the repeating of the previously made mistakes. Especially bad ones. It won't stop you from making mistakes, but it helps.

    11. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by DalM · · Score: 1

      Yes. 15 years ago there was a huge rise in Nationalism in the US. That was my point.

      Nationalism doesn't mean Hitler.

    12. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      Maybe the fact that people have seemed to have forgotten what happened the last time nationalism, populism, and authoritarianism surged in popularity about 80 years ago....

      No more so then they forgot what happened when leftism went amuck around the same time. As it stands the left seems far more impact, in a negative way, on a day to day basis. After all they are the ones pushing censorship harder, force conformity at pain of being ostracized or worse, and completely own Universities by their own admission. Yet some defy reason and continue to fear the right. Very odd.

    13. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry but how many 'graduates with degrees' do we REALLY need to remind us of the details? Especially since it's quite easy to Google the facts or spend a day on Wikipedia delving in to the history of Vietnam (French IndoChina) to get a good picture of what the series of events were that took the world from WWII to the Vietnam war for example (I did that one day...it was interesting).

      Push comes to shove we don't need a bunch of people with History degrees to support the continuation of documenting history or for the general population to remain informed. Don't get me wrong, I love history, I took several classes in University while getting an M.Sc in Physics but there's NO way I'd be doing what I do today (getting paid what I do) had I gotten a History degree & only dabbled in physics.

      Don't even get me started on the flock of people getting Gender Studies 'degrees' & expecting to get high paying jobs in a product industry....good luck with that.

    14. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're clearly not old enough to remember when literally everyone knew the Nazis were/are a far right movement. Most of us remember when right wing think tanks started revising history to push that BS idea, but the younger, less critically thinking kids nowadays just believe whatever they're told despite historical evidence.

    15. Re:Seems pretty clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've seen enough authoritarianism by now to understand pretty clearly how it works. Real fear of right-populism is not at all odd or unreasonable in light of that knowledge. Today:

      Who is demonizing the media?

      Who is demonizing immigrants?

      Who is engaged in voter suppression?

      Which politicians have abandoned all fixed principles or policy positions they once supported (free trade?) in favor of personal loyalty to a "leader," or at least sufficient political fear of his base to pretend loyalty?

      Who do the actual, self-described _Nazis_ in this country actually vote for? What explains their overwhelming party preference to you, and are you comfortable sharing that preference?

  13. Don't worry guys. Trump will... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Make Humanities Great Again!

  14. Humanities have a place in education by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

    I think UChicago has a good setup in their Core Curriculum where all students take a series of interdisciplinary sequence intended to give students analytic, critical thinking and writing tools as a foundation for their education. By introducing students to the basic inquiry tools used in all fields they are better prepared when pursuing a specific discipline; as well as for critically thinking about ideas from all disciplines.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:Humanities have a place in education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, first they make everyone take the basic high-school classes that were deemed too difficult for high school students (so that the illiterate students don't have to be shamed by failing a grade), then they start the college courses.

      In a decade or two, they won't start offering specialized classes until doctorate level.

    2. Re:Humanities have a place in education by Mr.+Dollar+Ton · · Score: 1

      This is normal. In many fields, you begin to be able to barely understand stuff after 4 years of hard work, but you're at that point pretty far from literate. You hopefully are when you finish your PhD. As knowledge increases, it takes more time to get up to the state of the art.

    3. Re:Humanities have a place in education by g01d4 · · Score: 1

      In many fields...t takes more time to get up to the state of the art.

      I'd say that's more true in STEM than in other fields, though the mitigating factor from a career standpoint is that "state of the art" is often a specialty with little broad application. A PhD in a STEM field can easily tag a person as over qualified for most jobs.

  15. Why is this on Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The US perception of education is so broken its not about getting educated anymore it's about paying for a job placement. The conversation here is going to be nothing but how that imaginary pipeline is only served by technology focused disciplines. So what's the point of bringing it up at all as a conversation point. People here can't fathom why anyone would get a degree in history when there are bridges to be built and that's pretty fucking sad.

    1. Re:Why is this on Slashdot? by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2

      People here can't fathom why anyone would get a degree in history when there are bridges to be built and that's pretty fucking sad.

      We can fathom it just fine.

      I personally was envious of Christopher Hitchens. He got a classical Oxford education in the humanities in the 1970s and it showed. His command of the language, his understanding of history, his argumentation ability, his critical thinking skills, his understanding of people, all top notch. Hearing him speak and argue extemporaneously was a joy, especially compared to listening to 99% of American "famous" people. American politicians especially have a hard time remembering their own damn points, and the moment they stray from their carefully memorized talking points, they flounder helplessly. That's not to say European politicians don't have the same problem. The number of people capable of really thinking is remarkably low, and many of them are hamstrung by a poor education. Mr. Hitchens was the pinnacle of what a classical education should achieve, but rarely does.

      That's not to say I agreed with his every conclusion—I didn't. He was an ardent supporter of the US invasion of Iraq, even after he became a US citizen and had to foot the bill himself. I never understood that.

      I suspect it's difficult to get a classical Oxford education in the humanities even at Oxford, nowadays. The post-modern infestation has spread everywhere.

  16. The actual study is far more interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The actual study by the history prof is far more interesting, and has far more data. Ignore the silly article by the journalist.

    http://sappingattention.blogspot.com/2018/07/mea-culpa-there-is-crisis-in-humanities.html

  17. Informed Students do whats in their best Interest. by nevermindme · · Score: 1

    Students and their Parents since 2008 lived through some pretty tough times in most of the first world. The economy has been flat outside of China and STEM for a decade with little job growth for those without a STEM degree, while STEM students make twice the national average wages in year 5 of their careers. A history major with a degree from 1976 is still looking for a better job outside of the public sector while the STEM worker is in post-retirement consulting or doing nothing beach combing. In 1980s parents only had one short economic downturn to demonstrate the fruitlessness of a German romance poetry degree.

    Now if we can wipe the standalone education degree from curriculum we would have better paid teachers in high school prepared to teach STEM to 14 to 18-year-olds. Also with carrer moblility one can give up the Mechanical Engineering track and fall into a IT track with all of 4 days of loss effort and bring a diversity that IT departments can use.

  18. Liberal arts as a whole by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    It's not just high school curricula that have fallen flat in the last two generations, it's the college ones as well. Look at what a Liberal Arts major had to take pre-WWII and compare that to 2018. You were expected to demonstrate a decent education in everything from history, to writing, to math and music. The idea was to create a broadly educated man who, while not a master, was a sufficiently decent "jack of all trades" that they could hit the ground running competently in most white collar fields that weren't STEM or law.

    Tell me what an English major with a minor in Queer Studies who wrote her dissertation on how lesbians were oppressed in 19th century Britain is going to do to add value to any organization other than a LGBT advocacy group or something equivalent. Students have been quickly realizing that no one cares if you have a degree if your value is non-existent.

    1. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by jythie · · Score: 1

      You kidding? Companies love hiring english majors. They can actually write and have people understand them. As for the minor in queer studies, queer employees probably appreciate having people around who know something about them. Given how much 'cultural fit' seems to favor young white men, having some other cultural knowledge in your department might 'fit' some talented people.

    2. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by nealric · · Score: 1

      Other than requiring classical Greek/Latin, things really have not changed that much for liberal arts education. The de-emphasis of Greek and Latin is to me a good thing. While those works are important to Western civilization, early 20th century institutions tended to emphasize them to the exclusion of all else.

      Subjects like Queer or Gender studies are red herrings. People love to rag on them, but they simply aren't a big factor in today's educational landscape. For one, very few students actually major in subjects like this. For another, such subjects are really just English/History/Sociology majors with a narrower focus. If they are well-taught, they will have all the rigor of a classical liberal arts education. They would add value to any position that demands good writing skills, understanding of social dynamics, and synthesis of a large amount of information. That being said, I would agree that such narrow specializations are far more appropriate for graduate research than undergraduate majors.

      As far as "hitting the ground running." Frankly, it didn't take much specialized knowledge at all to hit the ground running in white collar fields prior to WWII. Consider running a business in the 1920s: There were no GAAP accounting rules and no SEC. Supply chains were relatively simple. Even the largest corporate deal documents were no more than a few dozen pages (compared to thousands for particularly complex deals today). The tax code was brand new and could almost be condensed into a pamphlet. All you really needed to succeed was decent raw intelligence and the right cultural background (i.e. be a WASP male).

    3. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure some white men are assholes. Guess what, some men are assholes and some women are assholes. Some of you are assholes. If you haven't figured that out yet and are still doing broad generalizations, then so can I: Maybe we just need to stop coddling people like they're children. On one hand, people coming in from other countries and entirely different cultures are able to adapt and integrate just fine, on the other you have US-born whiners that need to change the world everywhere they go so it fits the safe space at their parent's house that they've been coddled in since birth.

      One's sex or sex orientation has nothing to do with their job, so we need LGBTQ advisors like a fish needs a bicycle. We don't have singles advisors and single people have to hear about other peoples children and how being late to the job is ok because they had to drop the kids off. We don't have married people advisors, and the married people have to hear about singles going to parties and doing what they do, and perhaps get confused why their desk is not covered in their children photos and scribblings. We all understand that some people live different lives than we do. As long as they don't get all righteous and in your face about it, we're good.

    4. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      You kidding? Companies love hiring english majors. They can actually write and have people understand them. As for the minor in queer studies, queer employees probably appreciate having people around who know something about them. Given how much 'cultural fit' seems to favor young white men, having some other cultural knowledge in your department might 'fit' some talented people.

      Nice post. You have the mandatory white male put down and promote the over representation of queers. Just add in something about minorities or a Trump put down and you should be the perfect liberal. Should you ever decide to look into statistics you will find that you're advocating prioritizing ~5% (queer et al) of the population over ~30% (white males) or 95% (straight people ie normal). Probably not the best idea in general though perhaps you're part of the 5% and favor self serving special treatment.

    5. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      You make it sound like running a business is completely different today, but it's really not. Buy your supplies, make your product, sell it, hire an accounting firm, consult a lawyer and pay the government.

      Yeah, there's a bunch of rules now, but you don't need to personally know all of it. You can just pay someone else to know it. Your competitors are in the same boat and paying the same costs. So in the end, you're still competing on product quality, marketing and supply chain costs.

    6. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      You kidding? Companies love hiring english majors.

      True.
      Of course those companies want people who can ask "You want fries with that?" with an educated flourish.

    7. Re:Liberal arts as a whole by nealric · · Score: 1

      Overall running of a business is basically the same, but there is a hole host of specialized roles within business administration that didn't exist before. One macro difference is the need to coordinate and parse all the information coming in from these subject matter experts.

  19. Humanities degrees are anything but useless by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    to a civilization. Contrary to popular thought you _can_ teach critical thinking. But you can't do it with Math. Math is too difficult a subject and there's no value in being 50% right.

    As for why you want people to learn critical thinking, well, what's one of the first things a fascist does when he seizes power? Even before he goes after guns? That's right, they crack down on the intelligentsia. Fascism can't exist in a country of critical thinkers. People see past the bullshit.

    As for why _you_ want to pay for the humanities (and with it a nation of critical thinkers), unless you get lucky and become one of the fascist's todies that doesn't get powerful enough to be killed (boy that's a fine line to walk, just ask anybody in the North Korea) then you're gonna be part of the working class. And do you really want to be part of the working class of a fascist dictatorship? Again, just ask anybody in NK...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Alypius · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And when the intelligensia become the fascists? People will see through that bullshit (and are), want to stop subsidizing it via taxes, and be called anti-intellectuals for their trouble.

    2. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Critical thinkers from the humanities? LOL. Try the opposite. Fields that actively ignore the scientific method and rely on what "feels" right or what "looks" right when talking about their data are anything but critical thinkers. Please fuck all the way off with your uneducated bullshit kid.

    3. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As for why you want people to learn critical thinking, well, what's one of the first things a fascist does when he seizes power? Even before he goes after guns? That's right, they crack down on the intelligentsia. Fascism can't exist in a country of critical thinkers. People see past the bullshit.

      The self proclaimed intelligentsia look pretty dumb in light of safe spaces, shouting down others as a primary form of debate, and their love of double standards. They are pretty proud of themselves but the rest of the world holds them in contempt. They are not heirs to such lofty ideals as "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" or "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." As far as facism not existing among critical thinkers, you may have a point but universities are bastions of intolerance and group think so there is in fact a negative correlation between universities and ability to think critically.

    4. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Humanities are a very useful set of subjects that everyone should be forced to take, especially philosophy; logic and ethics in particular. However Humanities Degrees are only useful in producing Humanities professors and occasional writers and artists. There's not a huge market for them.

      As for why you want people to learn critical thinking, well, what's one of the first things a fascist does when he seizes power? Even before he goes after guns? That's right, they crack down on the intelligentsia. Fascism can't exist in a country of critical thinkers. People see past the bullshit.
       

      Lately, a lot of Humanities profs in the U.S. have been fascists. Not in name, but in action. The first that comes to mind was that professor who asked for "muscle" to attack a reporter for the school's newspaper because she didn't like media presence at her mob incitement rally.

    5. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, you have done a fully scientific survey of all the humanities and the way they operate before coming to that conclusion. What? You haven't and are just spouting what 'feels' right? How ironic.

      P.S. The Humanities and the Social Sciences aren't the same thing.

    6. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah so lack of critical thinking causes fascism? I guess socialism and its evil twin communism is good from a critical thinking perspective or is there a teensy flaw in your hypothesis that you have developed critical thinking skills?

    7. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you say fascist you mean violent socialist right?

      Or are you displaying your critical thinking skills here?

    8. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      And when the intelligensia become the fascists?

      If you had studied history, you'd know this hasn't happened and isn't happening. It's just your excuse to be anti-intellectual. The reason we need people who study humanities is that they're able to point out where you're wrong and the fallacies you used to get there.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      but universities are bastions of intolerance and group think so there is in fact a negative correlation between universities and ability to think critically.

      My guess is that you're get your notion of what's happening on college campuses from critical thinkers like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. What was the last time you've been on a college campus or spoken to any university professor?

      They are not heirs to such lofty ideals as "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" or "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

      I bet you have no problem with lofty ideals such as telling people not to "monkey things up" by electing a black candidate.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you even know what critical thinking is?

      Math is nothing more than a language to remove everything except the most critical elements of a physical process. The only way you get ANY critical thinking about a process is to reduce it to the numbers. Until you do that, you don't really KNOW anything about it. I guess your attitude explains the SJWs of the world. They're unable to grasp the concept of a multiple regression analysis, and instead blame everything on racism or sexism.

      Humanities students need to train their minds in the critical thinking of math as much as anyone else.

    11. Re: Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I teach prob and stats. After students fail my subject, they enroll in humanities so that they can avoid me.

      Can they think critically? Oh I don't think so.

    12. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      However Humanities Degrees are only useful in producing Humanities professors and occasional writers and artists. There's not a huge market for them.

      There's not a huge market for mathematicians either, but I doubt that you'd suggest that mathematics degrees are not useful.

      Lately, a lot of Humanities profs in the U.S. have been fascists.

      If you'd taken some Humanities courses, you might have learned the actual definition of "fascist" and would now realize just how full of shit your statement really is.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    13. Re: Humanities degrees are anything but useless by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I teach prob and stats.

      Statistically, the probability that you actually teach "prob and stats" approaches zero.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1, Insightful

      but universities are bastions of intolerance and group think so there is in fact a negative correlation between universities and ability to think critically.

      My guess is that you're get your notion of what's happening on college campuses from critical thinkers like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. What was the last time you've been on a college campus or spoken to any university professor?

      They are not heirs to such lofty ideals as "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" or "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

      I bet you have no problem with lofty ideals such as telling people not to "monkey things up" by electing a black candidate.

      I don't listen to talk radio of any sort, I prefer to read my news. That said I pick from a variety of outlets including liberal ones like Yahoo news and international ones like BBC. I was on a college campus last week as my GF works on one. In fact she was considering what her shift should dress up as for Halloween this year (last year was all pirates) and one possibility was cowboys & indians. I discouraged her from it as someone, like yourself, would pitch a fit.

      I could care less if someone says Monkey as part of a phrase. I recall a friend of mine using the phrase "cheeky money" and getting in trouble for it once by a chip on her shoulder politically correct type because he once said it to a black girl. I think it was over reacting then and I still consider it over reacting now as he used the phrase for everyone not just her. When one can be as overt as saying cancel all white people and get a pass why would I care about a common phrase like monkey it up. What's good for the goose is good for the gander - or does that phrase offend someone too?

    15. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you say fascist you mean violent socialist right?

      Or are you displaying your critical thinking skills here?

      The colloquial meaning for fascist (as used even by antifa) is anyone suppressing the rights of others through force. Which surprisingly, is what antifa does.

    16. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by nicklikesfire · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Can I come to your house and scream at you about why my value system is great, and your value system is terrible? How about your job? Want to invite me along next time you go jogging or riding a bicycle so I can mock your religious views? Can I sit shotgun on your morning commute and berate you about your lifestyle choices? Care to have me preach about satanism at your local church?

      No? Are those safe spaces for you?

      You have a misunderstanding of the term safe spaces. It should be obvious by now that most people have plenty of "safe spaces". But, imagine you're a LGBTQ college kid who shares a 12' x 12' dorm room with a bigoted moron. Where do you go to get away from that.

      And I agree that shouting down others as a primary form of debate is awful, and all too common. But if you think it's somehow limited to liberal college kids, you must have a very narrow view of the world yourself.

    17. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of uneducated bullshit, you clearly have not studied Philosophy and know precisely zero about it.

      It has *nothing* to do with what "feels" right. Nothing. It is all about in-depth and rigorous analysis in its general form. Your beloved scientific method was produced by philosophers using these methods (though you wouldn't know that either, since you haven't studied your history).

      Critical Thinking is anything but the exclusive property of the natural sciences. Maybe you can begin your education here

      Snip: "The earliest documentation of critical thinking are the teachings of Socrates recorded by Plato."

      You are as wrong as you are arrogant.

    18. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However Humanities Degrees are only useful in producing Humanities professors and occasional writers and artists. There's not a huge market for them.

      There's not a huge market for mathematicians either, but I doubt that you'd suggest that mathematics degrees are not useful.

      Pure Mathematics degrees aren't really that useful, and I suggest people away from them when possible. I even suggest people away from Computer Science, which was my field, unless they really want a niche career. Just like with English and Philosophy, there are some avenues your can pursue with Math and CS, but higher education seems to be the forefront. Again, none of these degrees are useless, but they have far less use than most people consider when first starting college.

      Lately, a lot of Humanities profs in the U.S. have been fascists.

      If you'd taken some Humanities courses, you might have learned the actual definition of "fascist" and would now realize just how full of shit your statement really is.

      I bet you still fight the good fight about calling crackers hackers, and gay means happy, not homosexual. Fascist, as used by ordinary people, means violent suppression of rights, especially freedom of speech.

      Perhaps a better term might be "Evil-intented hypocrites", but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

    19. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, nobody really likes right wingers, that much is clear as day. Nobody really considers them intelligent though, except themselves. The fact that they've been rapidly vanishing from any sort of STEM field due to self-selection. It turns out you can't get STEM jobs when 90% of your beliefs require you to believe that logic, math, and science are all liberal conspiracies.

    20. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by skam240 · · Score: 1

      "They are pretty proud of themselves but the rest of the world holds them in contempt. "

      Or maybe you dont speak for "the rest of the world". I mean shit, maybe try walking your talk

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    21. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by ole_timer · · Score: 1

      I dis-agree - you need math to understand statistics and humanities without stats is just opinion...

      --
      nothing to see here - move along
    22. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by werepants · · Score: 1

      Contrary to popular thought you _can_ teach critical thinking. But you can't do it with Math. Math is too difficult a subject and there's no value in being 50% right.

      I agree with your general sentiment (that humanities degrees are useful) but disagree that they are better than math at teaching critical thinking, or even as good as math. Honestly, there are two subjects that dramatically improved my critical thinking skills - physics, and statistics. Both of them use applied math to analyze and solve real world situations.

      The thing that you point out (no value in being 50% right) is the exact reason that many STEM classes are better than humanities at teaching critical thinking. You can't learn to think clearly or accurately if you don't have external feedback showing you precisely where your thinking has failed. What makes critical thinking valuable is that you can evaluate an answer and figure out if it is wrong, and hopefully say why. And that's exactly the skill that you build in STEM classes, and particularly in classes that teach how to apply math. You try to think through a problem, find out that your thinking failed, and learn to catch logical errors. This makes you good at seeing through propaganda, and it makes you good at jobs where logical correctness is of key importance (in some fields it isn't a main priority, and can even be a liability).

      Spending a bunch of time writing subjective essays that are subjectively evaluated by biased professors just teaches you how to be articulate and verbose, and how to tell people what they want to hear (these are all useful skills, btw, but are orthogonal to critical thinking). There are many, many folks who get a PHd in the humanities without ever learning to, for instance, tell at a glance what's wrong with a given statistic used in propaganda. The humanities are tremendously valuable to society and give you many skills as an individual - but critical thinking is not necessarily among them.

      You are right that math is hard. But critical thinking is also hard. We get good at critical thinking by doing thinking that is hard, and learning to recognize logical errors.

    23. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Honestly, there are two subjects that dramatically improved my critical thinking skills - physics, and statistics. Both of them use applied math to analyze and solve real world situations.

      Yes.... these two subjects at a level advanced enough to require knowledge of at least single-variable differential and integral calculus are subjects that ANYONE graduating from college ought to be required to take -- as necessary to be well-rounded.

      It doesn't matter if your degree is humanities --- If you are lacking in High-School Algebra, Trigonometry, or Calculus, then you should not be admitted as a Freshman until you take remediation up to that basic level in math.

    24. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, everyone who doesn't share your exact cultural values is a "bigoted moron".

    25. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by TimMD909 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have a misunderstanding of the term safe spaces. It should be obvious by now that most people have plenty of "safe spaces". But, imagine you're a LGBTQ college kid who shares a 12' x 12' dorm room with a bigoted moron. Where do you go to get away from that.

      My suggestion would be to deal w/ the problem and sort shit out. If you can't handle dealing with one asshole without folding into a puddle, I've got terrible news for you: the world is filled with them.

      Your argument strikes me as a strawman. Pretty sure every single college in the country has a procedure for when two students living together need to be relocated. So what's your argument boil down to? It's difficult to switch roommates?

    26. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by nicklikesfire · · Score: 1

      In fact she was considering what her shift should dress up as for Halloween this year (last year was all pirates) and one possibility was cowboys & indians. I discouraged her from it as someone, like yourself, would pitch a fit.

      It doesn't offend me personally, but do you really not see why people dressing up as an "Indian" would actually be offensive to many Native people? Because that's the issue here.

      I can explain it if you're curious:

      White people came over from Europe and committed atrocities against the native population of the Americas for hundreds of years, and now some of us think it would be fun to dress up as a member of that (still oppressed, discriminated against, and suffering lasting effects of the aforementioned genocide) culture.

      I can see why someone from a Native American culture would be offended, so I don't dress up as an "Indian", and if you choose to anyway, I'll probably think you're an asshole.

    27. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It turns out you can't get STEM jobs when 90% of your beliefs require you to believe that logic, math, and science are all liberal conspiracies.

      Funny that you offer a false liber conspiracy about conservatives.

    28. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      The self proclaimed intelligentsia look pretty dumb

      "Intelligentsia" is a accolade given to someone with a track record of persuasive and sophisticated arguments about complex topics. It is not something someone gets to claim about themselves, 'cuz they threw a little political rally on campus and yelled a lot.

      "Self proclaimed intelligentsia" is chock-filled with people entirely lacking in self-awareness. They are too easy fodder for Straw Man arguments.

      You have seen some the left wing nutters. Have you noticed the right wing nutters whining about "avocado toast" and "virtue signaling" in the same rant? Talk about unintentional irony!

    29. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

      "Monkey it up" is not a common phrase - mess it up, fuck it up, screw it up, yes, but monkey it up? There was definitely something on the Republican candidate's mind and I figure it was more dog whistling than warning to his fgollowers.

      --
      That is all.
    30. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize Trump supporters are living the life that you abhor, yet your world view does not even consider them as being human, let alone ones that deserve the same "safe spaces" as LGBLT+rye people do by law already.

    31. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't offend me personally

      I'll probably think you're an asshole.

      So...you would be offended.

    32. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by blindseer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Can I come to your house and scream at you about why my value system is great, and your value system is terrible? How about your job? Want to invite me along next time you go jogging or riding a bicycle so I can mock your religious views? Can I sit shotgun on your morning commute and berate you about your lifestyle choices?

      A speaker coming to a campus, like Milo Yiannopoulos who had his speaking event canceled at a campus near me, is not screaming at me from the passenger seat in my car. These are people that reserved a space on a campus and if you don't like what they have to say then invite your own speaker. In fact I'd be fine if you hold up some placards outside the event. What should never be tolerated is violence in response or disrupting the event with noise making and screaming. If you want the freedom to share your views then you must tolerate those you oppose to speak as well.

      Care to have me preach about satanism at your local church?

      No? Are those safe spaces for you?

      I do feel that my church is a safe space. I suspect that if you ask nicely that you might actually be allowed to speak on satanism at the church, perhaps not during scheduled Sunday worship but the building is open to many diverse groups to meet, such as a local ham radio club that meets in their basement.

      You have a misunderstanding of the term safe spaces. It should be obvious by now that most people have plenty of "safe spaces". But, imagine you're a LGBTQ college kid who shares a 12' x 12' dorm room with a bigoted moron. Where do you go to get away from that.

      You get away from that by a complaint to the people that run the residence halls. They don't want to see those assigned a room together to get in fights and such so they will find another room. At a minimum they would be most likely willing to let someone out of the contract, I was able to do that because I was not happy in my room. It wasn't a roommate issue, just that the room was only 12x12.

      And I agree that shouting down others as a primary form of debate is awful, and all too common. But if you think it's somehow limited to liberal college kids, you must have a very narrow view of the world yourself.

      No, I'm pretty sure it's limited to liberal college kids. Most anyone else in college is too focused on doing their calculus and the rest just plain grew up.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    33. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Oligonicella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Now imagine you're a straight, religious person and were assigned a room with a cross-dressing trans with a full beard who won't shut up about trans rights. The kid in your example has exactly the same options (as well as safe rooms) as the kid in mine - request a new room and roommate. The safe rooms are superfluous.

    34. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      “The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state,”

      Perfectly understandable. Appears you may be the dog.

    35. Re: Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we need the people that teach calculus to let us know when it approaches 0.

    36. Re: Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that that religious person has literally the entire world to be that way with few consequences. Oppression of straight people for being straight really isn't a thing and likely never will be.

      Not that I support safe spaces, we didn't have them when I was sorting things out and I don't see the need now. At least not in places where jail and murder aren't likely.

    37. Re: Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever, man. You go on your SJW propaganda. We math profs who are silent so far won't put up with your kind for long.

    38. Re: Humanities degrees are anything but useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, philosophy was a humanities class and did get into a very minor amount of Boolean Logic: evaluating whether certain sentences were true and false.

      We learned about the forms of arguements and drawing out conclusions from reasoning.

      If some A are B, and some B are C, can we say that some A are C? This is readily applicable to this entire forum.

      Also, in both English and Philosophy, we learned all about the logical fallacies; such as claiming to be be an authority (experts can be wrong), bandwagon argument (everybody agrees with me), strawman arguments, (ignoring the subject matter).

      Humanities can certainly help in critically thinking.

    39. Re:Humanities degrees are anything but useless by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      It doesn't offend me personally, but do you really not see why people dressing up as an "Indian" would actually be offensive to many Native people? Because that's the issue here.

      I can explain it if you're curious:

      White people came over from Europe and committed atrocities against the native population of the Americas for hundreds of years, and now some of us think it would be fun to dress up as a member of that (still oppressed, discriminated against, and suffering lasting effects of the aforementioned genocide) culture.

      I can see why someone from a Native American culture would be offended, so I don't dress up as an "Indian", and if you choose to anyway, I'll probably think you're an asshole.

      It clearly offends you personally. The people who committed the atrocities are all dead. Note that atrocities were committed by both sides, but all the same they are all long dead. And have been for generations. The native ancestors have the option of living on a reservation or not. In California it's a big boon for them due to casino money. They are very privileged beneficiaries and if somehow the clock was turned back and they were given the option of living in the stone age, as California Indians were, or with their easy casino money there would be few if any that would choose the stone age. They are hardly oppressed, the "discrimination" they face is the perks and benefits that they get over other Americans, and they most definitely aren't suffering. If the tables were turned and the indians wanted to dress up in traditional Oktoberfest outfits should they be allowed or banned for cultural appropriation? I suspect strongly that you are part of the double standard crowd that gives them a pass but wouldn't allow me to do the same.

  20. Degree v.s. Education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I completely agree. The humanities are very important to study, lest we need an orange revolution to clean up after the orange leader. However, 4 years of debt to study something that doesn't lead to employment is a foolish financial decision, and frankly, a foolish decision for the lender. I put my money where my mouth is. I got a EE degree, got a reasonable job, and then studied history at the graduate level without debt. Now I have a masters in history that's pretty useless, but the learning was valuable, and I still have a job and the only debt is the mortgage payment.

    We certainly need the humanities in the liberal arts core, and it's a shame that the universities in general do a miserable job of teaching the humanities ... memorize this shit from a boring post-doc who doesn't want to teach freshman history, crib a paper off last semesters, to be graded by a grad student who doesn't care about grading papers. Given how fucking expensive tuition has become, there's certainly the money to make the humanities a discussion based course and charge double to those who blow it off and earn an F the first time. Grade replacement will take care of dad-with-the-BMW's angst.

  21. A sign of sound financial thinking by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    With the cost of degrees going up (and an economic depression in living memory), new students are focusing on education that can offer financial security and a stronger return on investment.

    If anything, this is a positive sign for the future.

    I think a lot of millenials got screwed by parents who suggested that any degree will work. Most teenagers need to be guided into good decision-making, and some parents failed to do that.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    1. Re:A sign of sound financial thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think a lot of millenials got screwed by parents who suggested that any degree will work.

      Not just parents, it was society at large.

      This hit my brother hard. The only thing his BA in Anthropology got him (when he finally got it completed) was getting fired because he was more educated than his boss. He was born in 79. It was a definately a thing for Gen X.

  22. adversely affects who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "It's not clear they are making the right decision." Why, because it adversely affects the Humanities diploma industry?

  23. It's obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I watched everyone around me lose everything they had built. Humanities just doesn't pay, and I can no longer depend on social security or pension plans. The percentage of people that felt comfortable with such a trade off, no longer are because they can't depend on a safety net in their later years.

  24. No Surprise by hduff · · Score: 1

    Students need a good paying job to repay huge students loans.

    What does a history major say when greeting new people? "Welcome to McDonald's! Would you like fries with that?"

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    1. Re:No Surprise by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

      Students need a good paying job to repay huge students loans.

      Ah, the modern indentured servant, isn't it fun?

  25. We don't need many historians by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    People don't care what historians tell them, so we don't need many of them. The masses can ignore what just a handful of them say as easily as many.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  26. Re:Oh look, Slashdot's favorite kind of headline! by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

    Not inferior but certainly not as useful.

    Which is fine if that's your passion or you want to try to make it work, but don't then whine to everyone about the financial burden you agreed to to get your questionably useful degree ( which is a popular pasttime for humanity degree holders ).

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  27. Yeah, well look... by JoeDuncan · · Score: 1

    Not everyone is independently rich enough to take useless degrees just for fun...

  28. There is a place for everything. by GregMmm · · Score: 1

    "Scared by a seemingly treacherous labor market, since the downturn college students have turned away from the humanities and towards job-oriented degrees. It's not clear they are making the right decision."

    Um, seemingly scared by a treacherous labor market? This is like saying hey after looking at the evidence I'm not sure the evidence is right. The market only needs so many humanity degrees and it appears before 2008 we had a glut. Seems like a simple market check. In this case the market is education. If there was a great demand of good paying jobs in say teaching history, guess what would happen.

    Also, a college education costs a lot of money. One can only hope people are looking at what kind of jobs and what they can earn, before choosing a major. Happiness isn't only dollars and cents, but blindly taking out 100k in loans without thinking of how to pay it back is not smart. As a number of people have found out.

  29. History majors would not be looking there anyway by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    STEM and business tend to suffer a lot of tunnel vision

    So do history majors - it's just that in tech the tunnel prevents them from seeing anything around them, with history majors they are prevented from seeing anything that happened past, say, Rome... and even then they get things badly wrong (see: all misconceptions around the "fall" of the Roman Empire).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  30. How petty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how much of the decline can be attributed to people like you, with large egos, engaging in the petty belittling of those you identify as lesser than yourself.

  31. Humanities has been redefined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It is no longer Homer, Plato, Socrates, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Machiavelli, Sir Francis Bacon, etc.

    It's now Genderqueer, Third-wave feminism, Queer Theory, Postcolonialism, and every other SJW Leftist Mind Fuck you can think of.

    1. Re: Humanities has been redefined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      They are everything but Betrand Russell now.

      They used to be great thinkers who ponders every possibility, now they are feeble-minded media-controlling SJWs that try to just silence everyone who isn't black, Muslim, or sexually preferred.

      It's all Derrida's fault.

    2. Re:Humanities has been redefined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would be funny were it not true.

    3. Re:Humanities has been redefined by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Would be funnier if it WERE true.
      it's not.

  32. Says a History Prof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's not clear they are making the right decision."

    It was clear to me 30 years ago and it remains clear to me now. Most of the humanities educational streams are economically useless, unless you intend to teach in the humanities. They make a person better educated but don't expect that humanities degree to pay off with a job.

  33. Re:That's too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    only level 60, then he's a casual and a slacker

  34. Also because bill collectors care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I read stories like this I realize as most should it's not a "STEM vs humanities" issue. It's that higher-education no longer represents a good value. People walk away from bad deals all the time...except for education. The system is fundamentally broken, and as long as we keep proclaiming our dependency on it, it'll never get fixed.

    1. Re:Also because bill collectors care by DalM · · Score: 1

      People can't walk away from education because our society holds traditional "sit-in-a-seat" education to an almost religious standing. You nearly can't do anything today without a college degree. So, there is no upper limit to how high college can cost. No matter how high the price, families will pay it because they believe they have to. If you don't, you are almost guaranteeing your own child will have limited opportunities.

    2. Re:Also because bill collectors care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A problem is that almost every job takes a college degree. At one point, "child care worker" didn't require a degree (feed children, playtime, supervision, lots of butt-wiping, etc.) - but then they only started hiring "BA in Early Childhood Development" because it looks good on paper - the job is the same, but now we have *qualified* people working here. The first ones to get the axe are the "unqualified" ones....

      This means that a degree, even a minor one, is required to wipe butts.
      And a degree, for most people, means debt (that sticks even through bankruptcy), and is $300-$1000 for the next twenty years.

      No guarantee that the loan isn't sold to someone with a higher interest rate either.

  35. Dichotomy by JBMcB · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's an interesting position to take. Humanities are required in the science and engineering fields - I had to take at least six classes of English, languages, arts or philosophy for my engineering degree.

    Now universities are eliminating math requirements from humanities curriculums. Because, apparently, structured critical thinking skills are not required in a rounded university education.

    At the very least make everyone take a statistics class. That's the one thing everyone seems to botch.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:Dichotomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The phrase "critical thinking" is notoriously difficulty to define clearly, and it tends to mean different things to different people. But one thing it almost never means is "good at math."

      Based on my experience studying a lot of high-level math, some science, and a lot of philosophy as well, I can say with confidence that the philosophy classes cultivated my critical thinking skills in a deep and rigorous way that was an entire world above anything that went on in any of my math classes.

    2. Re:Dichotomy by werepants · · Score: 1

      Did you take physics or statistics? Because pure math is often just manipulating symbols and so it's difficult to see the relationship with anything in real life. Being good at algebra doesn't mean you're a good critical thinker. But applied math (like physics and statistics) shows you how to use the formal methods of math to solve incredibly complex problems, gives you better tools for critical thinking than just about anything, and gives you practice using them in real-world scenarios.

      I took many philosophy and English courses - they didn't hold a candle to Physics 101 for learning to really think clearly.

    3. Re:Dichotomy by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      Even as a comp e, my brain hated stats.

  36. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *I* don't want to pay for *someone else* to get an education that produces no marketable skills.

    "Being a critical thinker" does not, in and of itself, mean the world owes you a free education. The role that philosophy students or history students (etc) serve in our society and in our politics does not, by any means, justify the personal costs that I must incur to fund their educations. There is absolutely not enough bang for my buck there. There is just a bunch of entitled little shits who think they deserve my money because they are so smart.

    And anyway, here is some critical thinking for you: As a student I can choose a major that is fun and engaging for me but that doesn't give me a means of earning a living, or I can choose a major that will instill into me some solid skills that are so valuable to others that they are willing to pay me to apply them.

    Simple choice, really.

    1. Re: Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who gets a free education that you pay for?

      I feel you are unfamiliar with educational finance and/or scholarship structures.

  37. Useful degrees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've saved a huge amount of money, over the years, with the knowledge I gained from mechanical, and electrical degrees. I can fix most things, and troubleshoot almost anything. I've also never need to hire an electrician, even when building a home.

    1. Re:Useful degrees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet it's surprising how many "smart" people are unable to see the value of saving a couple hundred bucks here and there over a lifetime. My culture pushes the hotness of throwing around money to citizens who then bitch about having to pay a plumber a c note to change a faucet washer. Idiots. And no one with whom to share a financial foxhole, whatever their education.

      If the women can't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.
          -Red Green

    2. Re:Useful degrees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can fix most things, and troubleshoot almost anything. I've also never need to hire an electrician, even when building a home.

      Same here. My degree from YouTube University just keeps on giving.

      Capcha: astute

  38. Spot on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you. Not being sarcastic. Your post is a fine example of some clear critical thinking on the topic.

  39. Easy majors get crappy jobs. Learn to love it. by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 0

    I studied computer science. I had a lot of difficult math classes and if you didn't do your homework you'd fail. Period. Nobody could just go to the math lab, take the test, and leave. Nobody could pass the classes without some pretty serious time-sink. That means I put 4-8 hours a night into studying so I could get decent grades and GTFO of academia (which I hate with a passion). Meanwhile, all these assholes who were taking History, Sociology, and PolySci were doing basically zero homework. They were chasing the sorority women. It's bad enough that the business-major weasels are now my bosses, but the rest of those easy-major assholes pretty much became teachers. Now they are bitching about their low pay and bad jobs. Well, guess what? You took the stupid-easy party-major in school and I have absolutely categorically fucking ZERO sympathy for you. No. You don't get a fucking pay raise on the backs of taxpayers. No. You don't get a pension. Save your money in a 401k like the rest of us (or not, I don't care). I will NEVER vote to increase funding for teachers or cops and their crooked unions. Stay in the slow lane you lazy bunch of whiners. Hope the fun you had in college was worth it, now you get to live with the consequences. Don't like it? You can always go back to school and study harder topics. No? Then stay in your lane.

    1. Re:Easy majors get crappy jobs. Learn to love it. by nealric · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you are bitter about not majoring in business.

    2. Re: Easy majors get crappy jobs. Learn to love it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are all bitter about that. Now fuck off. We outnumber you.

    3. Re:Easy majors get crappy jobs. Learn to love it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll harder. No one is this stupid, it's too unbelievable.

    4. Re:Easy majors get crappy jobs. Learn to love it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a philosophy degree, so does my boss, and we both work in the actual field of computer science earning 6 figures. Computer Science is certainly math, but most CS programs I have examined focus too much on programming computer languages and software development, neither of which is computer science. In the field of computer science, your degree certainly matters. If you are a programmer... why did you waste your time and money with college... unless it was to get laid? You made some deep errors in judgement, son.

    5. Re:Easy majors get crappy jobs. Learn to love it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking as an IT person who majored in a hard science, I think teachers are actually in the best position possible. In a world where salaries for all jobs are shrinking, the best you can hope for is a _stable_ job. Teachers have this, and depending on where they work they are paid pretty well if they stick with it for a long career. If someone had told me I could be a highly-sought after high school science teacher if I spent another 2 years in school and got a NYS teaching certificate, I might have taken them up on it!

  40. Student Debt, Rising Colledge Cost and MOOCs:HB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As the latest Humble Bundle shows (https://www.humblebundle.com/books/essential-knowledge-books?) MOOCS, like telecommuting has promise, BUT it's requires a greater degree of discipline to work.

  41. Why not both? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holding degrees in both engineering and psychology, my experience has been that the former gave me the skills necessary to excel in a career focused on the latter. Undergraduate education may best be spent learning how to solve problems. If you want to look to the humanities or social sciences for problems to solve, wait until graduate school.

  42. Coming soon to STEM... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A good student with a humanities degree has very marketable skills, particularly in language and communication. They can identify and rebut bad arguments, make convincing and valid arguments, and even make bad arguments sound convincing. These are commercially valuable skills. The problem isn't the "uselessness" of the subject matter expertise they accrue. Many of the programmers I know studied physics or math. My friends who studied electrical engineering? Coders. They haven't designed a chip since their honours project.

    When's the last time NP-completeness or Turing machines were relevant to the typical /.er's work? It's a rarefied few who put to use their knowledge of compiler or kernel design. Nevertheless, the skills learned in mastering those subjects are the reason they are able to analyse and solve analogous problems. The same goes for history majors. The true cause of the fall of the Roman empire is lost to time, if there ever was a "true cause". But the skills learned by formulating arguments pro et contra Gibbon's views enable them to coherently parse and argue analogous debates.

    The smart humanities graduates I know are bond traders (philosophy), lawyers (history, linguistics), bankers (English), marketing executives (classics), journalists (political science), and business owners (women's studies). The stupid ones serve coffee, just like the stupid engineers and computer scientists who work in tech support. The problem is that universities have allowed many more of the stupid to graduate from humanities programs than they have from STEM programs. It gives the rest of us a bad name.

    Let's focus on the problem with humanities - the decline of academic rigour. And let's focus on the problem with universities - mass enrolment for profit. If we keep pretending that everyone should be going to university, and the trend of rising STEM enrolment continues, then it won't be long before standards in STEM subjects start to fall. Do your non-genius kids a real favour - let them study a trade.

    1. Re: Coming soon to STEM... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go shut down the absolute-nutcase departments like gender studies first. Then we'll talk. (Not holding my breath.)

    2. Re: Coming soon to STEM... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your argument is neither valid nor convincing. If you're ever critical of gender studies in the future because of its alleged insults to free-speech, keep in mind you just made discourse with me conditional on an arbitrary outcome that is outside of our control. You're using the same formula as "Try being a woman, first. Then we'll talk."

      Here's some food for thought:
      Back when my grandfather studied chemistry, electrons were "fictive constituents". Sometimes the nutcase theories turn out to be true. We find out by letting them develop: if they're true enough they'll stand on their own legs. Electrons turned out to be real (enough). Is the third gender real? I don't know, but does my ignorance give me the right to stop someone else's free inquiry? Once they are proven wrong, we can point to the negative result and discourage future inquiry. Or they may be on to something. Time will tell.

  43. need to have student loans with bankruptcy! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    need to have student loans with bankruptcy!
    Only way to get school cost under control

  44. Re:History majors would not be looking there anywa by Moof123 · · Score: 1

    There is a pervasive mindset in CS majors I have run into that all that matters is coding. Far to often they jump right in and start barfing code down without understanding the real application. The result in major rip-up whenever a requirements doc is not bulletproof (and when are they ever?). Training them in school to design an overall approach, mockup the UI, get sign off from customers, then finally code it up would make a lot of projects go faster and better in the long run.

    In school this shows up as a mindset of getting through all their CS classes in the fastest, least engaged fashion possible. TA'ing a EE class for CS majors was eye-opening and depressing. Many of them dry lab'ed their work claiming they didn't need to test their solutions (many bits of their assembly code were just wrong).

    I don't think that History majors being added in will solve this. I do see a need for CS to mature. Perhaps in another decade or two the churn in languages, frameworks, etc will settle out and they can pull their heads out of their Mountain Dew pile to smell the roses, who knows... I work with a lot of EE's turned coders who got their jobs specifically because pure CS majors struggle when understanding complex RF things being processed in software/firmware cannot be handled by simple function calls. A coder with some RF and math background handles this stuff in stride.

  45. But who will manage McDs and sell clothes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But who will manage McDs, Pizza Hut, and sell clothes without English, History and Psychology majors?

    I've come across recent CompSci majors who don't know how to code too. I didn't know if I should laugh or cry.

    And once, 20+ yrs ago, I came across a CS PhD who didn't know that trig functions use radians. Took him a week to figure it out.

  46. Is this the 2008 crisis or Second Dotcom Bubble? by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    There's no getting around the fact that college is extremely expensive. It makes perfect sense to me that people entering college today, unless they have a full scholarship and a "free pass" like inheriting a family business later on, wouldn't be studying humanities. They're going to try to maximize their employability if they have the ability to do so. I majored in chemistry 20 years ago, and this was because I realized that I wasn't going to be able to handle the math in the engineering curriculum I was aiming for, AND that some random business management or psychology degree wasn't going to be a good return on investment.

    I'd say the students trying to be as employable as possible are making a smart decision. However, I wonder if the humanities people are going to have the last laugh. Automation and offshoring are rapidly eating up entry level STEM jobs and humanities are going to be one of the few things an algorithm and cloud automation platform aren't going to be able to handle. When I went to school (graduated 1997) it was almost a guarantee that anyone getting through a degree program would find work somewhere. Large corporations would basically do cattle calls for all the management school grads and send them off to some random entry level job doing TPS reports. I'm thinking it's a little different now...Accenture sent the TPS report processors offshore, Infosys runs the company's IT from India, etc.

    I also wonder this...we're in the middle of the Second Dotcom Bubble, which started inflating right after the financial crisis (iOS and Android gained ground shortly after this, followed by cloud, DevOps, etc.) Are we seeing tons of new computer science grads the same way we did when everyone in 1998 was getting a CS degree? Are they chasing the money again and lining up to be JavaScript front end developers for 6-figure salaries at hip startups?

    IMO there's nothing wrong with going to college...at worst it's a good way to grow up a little bit before heading into the real world. If you get into a top 10 school, it can change your life because no one graduating one of these schools will ever fail to find an opportunity. If you don't, you can go to a "regular" state school, work hard and find a path to success that way. The not-so-smart money is in these little private colleges...that $50K+ investment per year really needs to pay off, and unless you're in the particular niche that these small colleges funnel grads into, you'll just be left with six figures of debt and no better off than a state school grad.

  47. Its about the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see it more that college cost more than a house now so people are actually looking for a return on investment. When you could work a summer job to pay for the following year there was nothing wrong with an Art History Major, However now that the same degree would take you 30 years to pay off with a job that Art History prepares you for people are thinking twice.

    1. Re:Its about the money by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      Portland state university came up with a "Pay it forward" Idea, whereby everyone would get some free tuition but pay a percentage of their post-graduation salary. Which probably just means stick the STEM grads with the bill. But you never know, some theater major may become the next Kardashian and fund everything.

      --
      Nullius in verba
  48. Re:adversely affects *whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because it adversely affects literacy, apparently.

  49. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  50. There really isn't very much of that by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Troll

    If anything most of the shouting down & censorship is done at the left.

    Basically, the right wing are running a victim complex to deflect attention away from their own actions. Think about it, the political right have complete control of virtually all branches and levels of government. There's a handful of left leaning districts in CA & NY, but nationally they've got the House, Senate, Presidency and locally they have virtually all the State Legislatures (they were just shy of calling a constitutional convention when a few crazies ruined for them by getting busted for sexual harassment so extreme it couldn't be ignored).

    I know it sounds like I'm trolling, but that's kind of what makes going after the American Right wing so hard. It's called Poe's Law. The stuff they're engaged in is so terrible you can't distinguish from somebody doing it and somebody making fun of it. But it's real. All of it. I'm sorry, but it's high time we wake up, smell the coffee, and put our house in order.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  51. Looks like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Big Bang Theory did its job.

  52. So? by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    In a few years, there might be a shortage of history, philosophy, English literature, and religion majors LMAO, said no one ever!

  53. Different folks are running the "asylum" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may be confusing the classical traditional approach to philosophy versus the current approach. If your course of study was 15+ years ago you might be quite surprised by today's classes. Different folks are running the "asylum" these days.

    1. Re: Different folks are running the "asylum" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not that AC, but my philosophy classes as of 3 or 4 years ago involved truth tables and logic/discrete math.

      I am pretty sure you are a moron and don't know what you're talking about.

  54. African Transgendered Womyn's studies majors by WCMI92 · · Score: 1

    will not give you a career. Except teaching others the same worthless degree.

    I am glad I dropped out of college in 1994.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  55. humanities by ackkamoto · · Score: 0

    seems like all those humanities degrees in the 60's *ahrem* clintons fucked it up for the rest of us.

  56. It's not clear they are making the right decision by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    Yeah it is.

  57. It's not just the pedigree by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    if you've got a college degree then employers know you're at least stable enough to make it through a 4 year degree.

    Now, if they weren't currently being allowed almost limitless access to imported foreign labor in the form of multiple work visas (don't trust the "caps", there's so many ways around them I can't list them all here) then that might not be a factor. But, well, I've yet to see any sign of any politician reigning that in. I was hoping really Trump would (he said he would), but so far he's burned me there. He still hasn't reversed the Obama era executive order allowing spouses of H1-B holders to work. That alone was tens of thousands of jobs closed off to American workers....

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's not just the pedigree by DalM · · Score: 1

      Always love Trumpie's logic. Employment is at the same time the best it's ever been because of Trump after Obama wrecked the economy AND the hyper-immigration problem is steeling all the jobs from good (white) Americans -which is also Obama's fault.

  58. Re:History majors would not be looking there anywa by blindseer · · Score: 1

    People misunderstand what computer science actually is, where it came from, and therefore what it means to study it. As someone smarter than me put it, "Computer science is to computers what telescopes are to astronomy." The computer is just the tool, it's not the ends. People take, or at least should take, computer science with the intent to understand the mathematics, algorithms, and so forth behind the science of computing. If the goal is to just write code then there's community college for that. If someone wants to know how to write code to meet a specification then that's engineering.

    Seems to me that it took decades for people to understand the distinction between computer science and software engineering. There's been some good software engineers that studied computer science, just like I met some good mechanical engineers that studied physics in college. Your experience mirrors mine, I've had classmates that major in engineering, computer science, as well as other majors, and there is certainly a different mindset among those in engineering and those in the sciences. Too many people have majored in computer science thinking that's what people take to write good code. It's not, and employers learned this too. I've heard recruiters talk about avoiding computer science majors until they've run out of engineering majors to hire.

    CS didn't need to mature, it was doing what it intended. What we needed was software engineering to mature as a discipline separate from EE, math, computer science, and the other realms from which it drew. I see this now in where I went to university, they didn't have a software engineering program. They didn't even have a formal computer engineering program separate from EE. Now they have both a computer engineering program and a "major track" in software engineering for people in EE, Computer Engineering, Computer Science, and other related majors. We'll probably see Software Engineering define itself more in the future and become a formal degree program that's separated out further and become a distinct major soon.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  59. On your last point it's much the opposite by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    see for a study citation that shows most of the censorship on campus is directed at left wing people. Make of it what you will but the study appears accurate. As for Milo, he was welcome to speak at the campus in question. They asked him to pay for his own security, which is the standard practice for controversial speakers who are likely to result in violence. It doesn't matter who causes the violence (left, right, white, black or purpose), what matters is that the even was deemed risky and required security and the school wasn't going to pay for it.

    Now, if you want a public space with full security paid for by tax payer dollars that's fine. But that's not what schools are. They're places of learning. The tone of your post implies an alt-right bent, which would mean you'd oppose taxpayer funded safe spaces for people to speak. Personally as a lefty I'm all for it. I'm also for mandating voting as a means of ending voter suppression and requiring people to participate in society.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:On your last point it's much the opposite by Raenex · · Score: 2

      see for a study citation that shows most of the censorship on campus is directed at left wing people. Make of it what you will but the study appears accurate

      Oh, really? Where's the study? You link to a YouTube video by a lefty pundit. If you watch the video, the 75% number comes from a Tweet. I challenge you to find a "study" that shows that 75% number. Let's see a proper citation, none of this regurgitation of a regurgitation.

    2. Re:On your last point it's much the opposite by blindseer · · Score: 1

      see for a study citation that shows most of the censorship on campus is directed at left wing people. Make of it what you will but the study appears accurate. As for Milo, he was welcome to speak at the campus in question. They asked him to pay for his own security, which is the standard practice for controversial speakers who are likely to result in violence. It doesn't matter who causes the violence (left, right, white, black or purpose), what matters is that the even was deemed risky and required security and the school wasn't going to pay for it.

      First is that I didn't mention where this censorship occurred and so your comment on the security fees being raised at the last minute was a lucky guess. Well, the odds were in your favor on that guess.

      Second, as this event was at a public university there is already precedent for the school to cover the security costs no matter how high it might be. Just because they believe a bunch of students will riot is not justifiable for a public school to pass on those costs to the student organization that made the invitation. If that was allowed then any school could deny any speaker by merely making the claim that the costs would be too high.

      Now, if you want a public space with full security paid for by tax payer dollars that's fine. But that's not what schools are. They're places of learning.

      Tell me something. What is a professor? What does a professor do and where does a professor perform his/her duties? The answer is the speak at a public space with full security paid for by the taxpayer. That's what schools are, places of learning by listening to people speak. Milo, Ben Shapiro, or whomever else you can think of, are merely invited professors that came to profess on a topic for which the students invited them. The people that got tickets for the event is not all that different than signing up for a lecture. I saw classes that gave credits for attending these lectures. As I recall they were one credit courses that were required for graduation in some programs, and the schools invited someone to speak twice per week on a variety of topics. If you attended enough of these lectures in the semester then you met that degree requirement.

      I don't know what kind of education that Milo Yiannapolous could offer but Ben Shapiro is a lawyer, author, and hosts a popular radio program, UC-Berkeley should be pleased to host someone as educated, intelligent, and popular as Shapiro. UC-Berkeley was taken to court for not wanting to cover the security costs and lost. If any other public school wants to pull that stunt again then I'm thinking they'd get the same treatment in any other court. Shapiro got to speak and the state had to cover the security costs. Milo put his foot in his mouth so deep I'm not sure he'd be able to talk, physically that is, even if anyone were to invite him. I find the man rather repulsive and boring so I'm glad he has faded away, but that doesn't mean I want him denied a platform.

      The tone of your post implies an alt-right bent, which would mean you'd oppose taxpayer funded safe spaces for people to speak. Personally as a lefty I'm all for it.

      I believe that past precedent on public speaking has already set the ground rules on public speaking. If any private organization wants to rent a park, amphitheater, stadium, or other public facility, for a speech or other event then they should be expected to pay for renting the property and providing security. With student organizations at a public school the rules are a bit different, the school is expected to provide security no matter what those costs might be, and the organization making the invitation is often expected to pay a standard fee that is appropriate for the size of the space requested. I will concede some latitude on the costs and appropriateness of the people invited but that would be exceedingly rare, such as a foreign dignitary, someone that's been con

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  60. "monkey this up" is a U.S. Navy slang by drnb · · Score: 1

    "Monkey it up" is not a common phrase - mess it up, fuck it up, screw it up, yes, but monkey it up? There was definitely something on the Republican candidate's mind and I figure it was more dog whistling than warning to his fgollowers.

    Nope.

    "The term "monkey this up" is a U.S. Navy slang term. And DeSantis was in the Navy, so he used words known in parts of the Navy world."
    http://www.orlandosentinel.com...

  61. Candidate former Navy, used Navy slang, non-racial by drnb · · Score: 1

    I bet you have no problem with lofty ideals such as telling people not to "monkey things up" by electing a black candidate.

    You are proving the point of others, of the "politicized intelligentsia" redefining things, or misinterpreting things out of ignorance, in a gratuitously political manner to frame a debate or assassinate an opponents character.

    In reality the phrase is old Navy non-racial slang and the candidate was in the Navy.

    "‘Monkey’ Navy slang
    Concerning the "monkey this up” comment by gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis: The meaning of words depends on one’s personal experiences.
    The same words mean different things to different people. The term "monkey this up" is a U.S. Navy slang term. And DeSantis was in the Navy, so he used words known in parts of the Navy world. Others heard something different, but that does not mean that DeSantis was trying to refer to race or anything else other than to say let's not goof up the good thing we've got going in Florida (my words, of course)."
    http://www.orlandosentinel.com...

  62. Re:Candidate former Navy, used Navy slang, non-rac by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    but that does not mean that DeSantis was trying to refer to race

    And yet, not two days later we learn that DeSantis just quit a racist Facebook group that he claims he was "unwittingly" an admin of.

    https://www.snopes.com/news/20...

    Sometimes, you just have to use a little common sense. DeSantis spent more time at Ivy League schools than he did in the Navy.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  63. The real problem are most switch to business by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    America has plenty of liberal arts students. As it is, at most universities, liberal art students have very little science, math, or even business, while the rest of degrees have plenty of liberal arts (the first is bad, the second is good).

    The real problem is that far too many are taking business which really is not needed. We need more science, engineering, math, etc. Far too few in any of these.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  64. What do they study for HISTORY MAJOR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do not understand why *UNIVERSITY* needs to provide classes for people to *STUDY ENGLISH* in order to get a *ENGLISH DEGREE*

    I mean, for fuck 's sake, what does one actually study in order to land a *HISTORY DEGREE*??

  65. Re:Candidate former Navy, used Navy slang, non-rac by drnb · · Score: 1

    And yet, not two days later we learn that DeSantis just quit a racist Facebook group that he claims he was "unwittingly" an admin of.

    According to your citation, the group was named "Tea Party". Hardly a stretch to image a conservative might join a so named group. Plus your citation also states that a friend who is in a group can add you to the group, and that any admin can assign a member admin rights. I've had that happen to me and was mildly surprised.

    As far as racist or bigoted content appearing in a group, well you and I are certainly guilty of that too. Others post that crap on /.. The real question is has the candidate posted racist or bigoted content, liked or shared such content, etc. And your citation answers that, he made no posts to the group.

    Also it is quite an exercise in political spinning to say that "Tea Party" is somehow inherently racist. To do so is evidence that one is merely attempting to manufacture perception to frame a debate, and yet again this sort of silliness is proving the point of others, not yourself.

    Sometimes, you just have to use a little common sense.

    Yep, group has innocuous name, others can add you, others can assign admin rights to you, no posts by candidate ... the facts match his explanation. Opinions to the contrary are "conspiracy theories" and we certainly wouldn't want to have anything to do with those.

    DeSantis spent more time at Ivy League schools than he did in the Navy.

    Irrelevant. The Navy has absolutely wonderful terminology and phraseology and word smithing that stays with one for life.

  66. Re: That's too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, be able to support yourself and be useful in society first, then if you like, dabble all you want.

  67. RTFA - Jobs offers before graduation by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    Had I RTFA, I would know this answer to this question: what happened to the number of job offers received by graduates in these various degree programs?

    Or rather, I would know if the FA answered the question.

    If none of the comments provide the answer, I'll just have to slog through it, myself.

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
  68. WindBourne's fact check - CLUELESS TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    clueless - R&D for history teachers

    verdict - troll, doesn't understand topic, didn't read the posts he replying to

  69. nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the oversupply of STEM graduates?