Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The argument to me is ... how much does your degree on it's own merit help you get a career?
...
I am an engineer. Trust ME!
Then you also know that your degree in engineering is completely worthless on its own merit if you are denied an engineering license. Why do you draw this "on it's own merit" distinction with liberal arts degrees, but not the exact same distinction with an engineering degree?
Then you also know that your degree in engineering is completely worthless on its own merit if you are denied an engineering license. Why do you draw this "on it's own merit" distinction with liberal arts degrees, but not the exact same distinction with an engineering degree?
Most engineers do not have licenses. I'll let an engineer explain more.
Now a nurse must have a license to be hired as an "RN".
It might be a little lower for nurses, but they have better job security.
It's a lot lower, about 30% lower, but yes, I'll agree there's more job security in nursing. Fortunately, DH is on his last job. If he gets laid off now, he'll retire. He just reached age 65.
Then you also know that your degree in engineering is completely worthless on its own merit if you are denied an engineering license. Why do you draw this "on it's own merit" distinction with liberal arts degrees, but not the exact same distinction with an engineering degree?
Only Civil Engineers are required to carry a PE for purposes of human safety.
Most other disciplines won't even bother to think about taking the test.
But you would know that.
Because I'm sure you took courses in Civil Engineering and were at the top of those classes too!
Most engineers do not have licenses. I'll let an engineer explain more.
Now a nurse must have a license to be hired as an "RN".
If the poster is calling themselves an engineer, I assume they are a PE in a field that requires a PE, which requires licensing. Doing otherwise is really professional misrepresentation. E.g. in geospatial work, calling yourself a surveyor without the actual license, even when you do surveying, is actually criminal in many states.
Only Civil Engineers are required to carry a PE for purposes of human safety.
Most other disciplines won't even bother to think about taking the test.
But you would know that.
Because I'm sure you took courses in Civil Engineering and were at the top of those classes too!
No engineering courses at University of Chicago when I attended They didn't believe applied science is a legitimate field of study. (Now that they went through the great Sonnenschein dilution to make the school more appealing to less academic students, the added their first engineering courses a couple of years ago. )
If the poster is calling themselves an engineer, I assume they are a PE in a field that requires a PE, which requires licensing. Doing otherwise is really professional misrepresentation. E.g. in geospatial work, calling yourself a surveyor without the actual license, even when you do surveying, is actually criminal in many states.
You know what happens when you "assume".
At my husband's place of employment, not only do they have people like him, with physics degrees doing engineering work, they have people who never graduated from college doing it. One guy went three years as a math major somewhere, and does basically what DH does with a PhD in physics. BTW, DH is not the only physicist I know doing engineering work.
No engineering courses at University of Chicago when I attended They didn't believe applied science is a legitimate field of study. (Now that they went through the great Sonnenschein dilution to make the school more appealing to less academic students, the added their first engineering courses a couple of years ago. )
I'm in Missouri. Even EEs have to have a PE here.
Normally, license is not required to practice engineering. As long as your employer is willing to hire you, you can be an engineer even if you don't have any engineering degree or license.
But that is a red herring. We're not talking about what relatively few, exceptionally bright outliers are able to do with their lives.
We're interested in how the population as a whole fares on average - yes, that includes the other 99%.
If financial success is how you define whether a degree is useless or not, doesn't it make sense to find out what people who have been the most successful studied?
I don't necessarily believe financial success is the be all and end all of life, but that is where this discussion has been focused. If people want to reach the top it makes sense to emulate the top. So called useless degrees are over represented among the top earners.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They didn't believe applied science is a legitimate field of study. (Now that they went through the great Sonnenschein dilution to make the school more appealing to less academic students, the added their first engineering courses a couple of years ago. 
)
