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.
I see nothing wrong with majoring in a traditional liberal art. I majored in history and have done fine. After your first job your major doesn't matter anyway, and your first job is usually most dependent on your network. For my first job I knew someone that knew someone, he made a call and I got an interview.
When they rank salary figures your english, philosophy, history, political science, economics majors are in the middle. It should also be noted It's things like theater and early childhood education that don't pay well. Wow, I never would have guessed that theater was not a high paying field!
Actually most degree holders are in a pretty similar place indicating that differences in individual skill diffrentiates them more - there's a group of about 20 majors that have high attrition and they are in demand as a result (engineering related fields mostly, some medical). Then the next 70 majors all have average incomes in similar middle-class ranges. Even art history is in this range. Then there are your poorly compensated majors that round out the bottom 20-30 that include traditional low paying fields like music, divinity/theology, drama, social work, elementary education. Also in this range are the generic no-major majors like "social sciences" or "liberal studies." Anything with "studies" at the end should be avoided.
Actually I think the specific vocational degrees are a problem - ie: hospitality, criminal justice. If your degree is something that on-the-job training provides normally there is a problem.
I will also note that "liberal arts" includes the natural sciences and mathematics.
If you'd like to ONLY focus on STEM, please take a look at what happened to the Soviet Union. The USSR had policies that said "there will be 35 art historians every year, no more no less" and everyone else should study something "useful."
They did get to space first and had some decent fighter jets.
Last edited by redguard57; 04-07-2015 at 05:58 PM..
I see nothing wrong with majoring in a traditional liberal art. I majored in history and have done fine. After your first job your major doesn't matter anyway, and your first job is usually most dependent on your network. For my first job I knew someone that knew someone, he made a call and I got an interview.
When they rank salary figures your english, philosophy, history, political science, economics majors are in the middle.
The U.S. economy has changed dramatically in the last 30 years to be sound advice for new graduates that are racking up six-figure debt at some of the lesser colleges. It may still apply to humanities grads from a few prestigious colleges, but I would suspect even that is changing.
perhaps one should have a definition of what exactly is STEM and what exactly is LA before going any further, a definition that everyone agrees on. For myself I really don't see much merit in arguing/debating something when both sides cannot even agree on what exactly the "something" is.
What subjects fall under the Liberal Arts branch, what subjects fall under STEM, are any subjects mutually exclusive to both STEM and LA?
Or perhaps the greater problem is not everyone will come to the point of "A,b,c, are Liberal Arts and d,e,f are STEM"? Will there always be, "well at my University A was considered a STEM degree"?
It's not so simple, unfortunately. The terms "Liberal Arts" and "STEM" are well defined and the traditional fields of study categorize easily within them. However, the taxonomy of modern fields is cloudy.
Liberal arts obviously includes the fine arts, social sciences, humanities, physical/hard sciences, mathematics, etc.
STEM obviously includes physical/hard sciences, technology, engineering and mathematics.
Technology is a real cloudy one. It includes computer science, which is a liberal art. But it also includes information technology which is not a liberal art. So you can't simply say whether technology is or is not a liberal art.
There is more to computer science than mathematics. Physics is very math-heavy, but it's not mathematics.
Exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by L210
The definitions are simple. STEM is simply science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. "Liberal arts," which is a term that has been around much longer than STEM, has included the sciences and mathematics for thousands of years. STEM and liberal arts are not meant to be mutually exclusively; some people have just twisted the terms so that they are. The STEM acronym is just a way to promote subjects with perceived shortages of qualified workers.
No, it's not really debatable at all whether CS falls into Science or Technology. Computer Science falls into Mathematics. The actual computer is no more important to computer science than an actual compass and straight-edge are important to Euclidian plane geometry. So it is under the umbrella of the Liberal Arts.
There are programs called Computer Science and Engineering; if they are accredited, they have to meet BOTH the requirements for Computer Science and those for Computer Engineering, so they're a hybrid degree, part Liberal Arts, part Engineering.
You're right that it's not debatable but you're completely wrong about computer science falling into mathematics (forgoing the many theorists who argue that mathematics, in itself, is a science). Computer science falls into science, which is a liberal art. Computer science is quite a bit more than computer programming.
Thankfully, no. I'm sure there are jobs where a software engineer could get stuck doing that (e.g. defense work, which I escaped a long time ago), but mostly no.
My point is that a software engineer doesn't write code as their primary function. While they may know how to code, they aren't programmers. They are process-oriented and focus on improving the engineering processes around developing software. Software engineer is just a fancy name for a process engineer that focuses on the processes of software development. IEEE and ACM define it better than I ever could.
I don't agree with that. There are research and testing labs around the country that hire biology majors right out of college. I have friends who have walked into jobs doing lab testing for oil refineries. Pharma research labs, and some environmental organizations hire biology majors.
The wages for people with undergraduate degrees in biology are not that great.
I was going to major in biology, but once I assessed the job market, I determined that the wages wouldn't make it worth it. I was living in a city that does a lot of biomedical research at the time. The biggest research institute was mostly looking for people with engineering and chemistry degrees. The lab jobs I came across paid $10-15 an hour. I still plan on getting an associate's degree in biology for personal fulfillment, but I don't plan on working in the field.
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.
