Interesting. I've visited Washington and Lee's campus before, it's right next to VMI. I don't why it was never on my list of schools to consider. Too small I think.
Yay liberal arts! I am a scientist but appreciate my liberal arts background.
Last semester I was chatting with a student and mentioned that I was attending a conference related to teaching in the liberal arts. He said "you're a scientist; what do you care about the liberal arts?" I almost cried.
Lol that engineering majors make $63k out of the gate. H has 12 years of experience and his professional license. He was just promoted and makes $66k. He's about to hop to a private sector job where the pay is, shockingly, not a ton better.
I have a histor degree from a state college. I'm "lucky" in that I'm employed in a history-related field. I expect that most people with a history degree, who are earning $100k+, aren't in a history field. Rather, they've applied critical thinking to finance, development, etc.
I have a histor degree from a state college. I'm "lucky" in that I'm employed in a history-related field. I expect that most people with a history degree, who are earning $100k+, aren't in a history field. Rather, they've applied critical thinking to finance, development, etc.
Exactly. I was a history major. In fact, I believe the most popular majors at my alma mater are government (political science) and then maybe biology after that but with english, history and pysch pretty close up there. And its just because as a liberal arts college it doesn't offer majors like business, communications, etc. So you major in history and then transition that to finance. Or you major in econ and go into finance. Or really you major in anything and then go to law school or b school.
Lol that engineering majors make $63k out of the gate. H has 12 years of experience and his professional license. He was just promoted and makes $66k. He's about to hop to a private sector job where the pay is, shockingly, not a ton better.
What kind of engineering does your H do?
Civil. Until this morning he was employed by a local government. He's resigning to take a job in the private sector. Admittedly, the pay range in MT is waaaay low across the boards.
Post by mollybrown on Sept 15, 2014 11:04:05 GMT -5
I know that this isn't common on this board, but I would pay big bucks to send my children to an elite liberal arts school. I had an amazing experience that just couldn't be reproduced at a large university. I've never had a problem getting a job with my Psychology and Sociology majors, even though my school is not well known outside of the East Coast.
I SAH, so I'm bringing down the average for my school.
I know that this isn't common on this board, but I would pay big bucks to send my children to an elite liberal arts school. I had an amazing experience that just couldn't be reproduced at a large university. I've never had a problem getting a job with my Psychology and Sociology majors, even though my school is not well known outside of the East Coast.
I SAH, so I'm bringing down the average for my school.
I don't think it's the major itself but the elite college that makes the difference, so I don't think I'd personally encourage majoring in liberal arts, but rather attending an elite liberal arts college. Me and my siblings all loved our liberal arts college experience.
See, to me there is a really fine balance between the benefits of an "elite" liberal arts college and the major. For example, if my kids want to go to a liberal arts college, I'm still going to push them into a major that is not art history. I can acknowledge there may be a benefit to these schools but I'm not going to foot the entire bill (even if we were in a financial position to do so-I would rather incentivize other choices) so it doesn't make sense for me to have my kids go to a very expensive school for a very low return.
I hear you! We still majored in stuff like Econ, Math and Engineering. Mostly because of our background, it's common to major in something professional-like.
See, to me there is a really fine balance between the benefits of an "elite" liberal arts college and the major. For example, if my kids want to go to a liberal arts college, I'm still going to push them into a major that is not art history. I can acknowledge there may be a benefit to these schools but I'm not going to foot the entire bill (even if we were in a financial position to do so-I would rather incentivize other choices) so it doesn't make sense for me to have my kids go to a very expensive school for a very low return.
This is exactly the misconception. Art History was a very popular major at my school, which is mentioned in the article. Those Art History majors went on to medical school, or investment banks, or consulting firms. No one cared what we majored in, as long as we had the right GPA. Top companies recruited on campus, or at events limited only to students at Ivies and certain liberal arts schools. In many cases, the name of the school is far more important than major.
In my experience, GPA usually trumps major for grad school. A 4.0 Psych major is going to get into medical school over a 2.0 Bio major. If both have the same GPA, the Bio major probably has an advantage, if course. There's something to be said for majoring in what you love and doing well.
In my experience, GPA usually trumps major for grad school. A 4.0 Psych major is going to get into medical school over a 2.0 Bio major. If both have the same GPA, the Bio major probably has an advantage, if course. There's something to be said for majoring in what you love and doing well.
All else being equal, I don't think the bio major is at any kind of advantage in med school admissions. (And I advise pre-med students at a liberal arts college!) Med schools are really interested in well-rounded students.
This is exactly the misconception. Art History was a very popular major at my school, which is mentioned in the article. Those Art History majors went on to medical school, or investment banks, or consulting firms. No one cared what we majored in, as long as we had the right GPA. Top companies recruited on campus, or at events limited only to students at Ivies and certain liberal arts schools. In many cases, the name of the school is far more important than major.
In my experience, GPA usually trumps major for grad school. A 4.0 Psych major is going to get into medical school over a 2.0 Bio major. If both have the same GPA, the Bio major probably has an advantage, if course. There's something to be said for majoring in what you love and doing well.
But  if they are going to go to med school, what is the advantage they gained by going to a liberal arts school and majoring in art history?  I think we just disagree fundamentally, I don't think there is generally inherent value in just going to college to learn.  College is there to achieve a purpose and if you want to be a doctor, why get a degree in art history?
I think you're right. What should a doctor major in? They have 4 years to learn about medicine. Why not spend the other 4 learning about something they're interested in if the end result is the same? As long as they get the pre reqs for med school, no problem.
I know that this isn't common on this board, but I would pay big bucks to send my children to an elite liberal arts school. I had an amazing experience that just couldn't be reproduced at a large university. I've never had a problem getting a job with my Psychology and Sociology majors, even though my school is not well known outside of the East Coast.
I SAH, so I'm bringing down the average for my school.
I totally agree with this, especially b/c I went to the liberal arts college mentioned in the example in the article.
In my experience, GPA usually trumps major for grad school. A 4.0 Psych major is going to get into medical school over a 2.0 Bio major. If both have the same GPA, the Bio major probably has an advantage, if course. There's something to be said for majoring in what you love and doing well.
All else being equal, I don't think the bio major is at any kind of advantage in med school admissions. (And I advise pre-med students at a liberal arts college!) Med schools are really interested in well-rounded students.
You're right. As much as I'll defend Psych and Soc to the death, I think there is a bias that it's harder to do well in the hard sciences. I've always heard people talk about admissions as if hard sciences got a bump. If that's not true, it almost seems foolish to major in something that requires labs unless that's your passion.
All else being equal, I don't think the bio major is at any kind of advantage in med school admissions. (And I advise pre-med students at a liberal arts college!) Med schools are really interested in well-rounded students.
You're right. As much as I'll defend Psych and Soc to the death, I think there is a bias that it's harder to do well in the hard sciences. I've always heard people talk about admissions as if hard sciences got a bump. If that's not true, it almost seems foolish to major in something that requires labs unless that's your passion.
Ehh. As a chemist, I think that bias is unfounded. Then again, majoring in bio will probably make the first two years of med school easier since you've already had some upper level biology. That's the main advantage I can see.
Hard sciences are more time consuming from the standpoint of lab meetings, but they also tend to require less writing.
I don't think there is generally inherent value in just going to college to learn. College is there to achieve a purpose and if you want to be a doctor, why get a degree in art history?
I almost went to the same fairly elite LA school my brother did to major in art history...lol. They offered us a great financial deal & I could play college volleyball there (I was not good enough for bug Univ). But I wanted to be an Architect (they didn't have that major) but they had a 4-3 agreement with Wash U so I'd end up with my MArch after 7yrs. Decided to go with a reg 4+2 combo to save myself a year but had to go to big universities. My bro with the Spanish degree has like 11 businesses now. Should've gone there. Lol
You're right. As much as I'll defend Psych and Soc to the death, I think there is a bias that it's harder to do well in the hard sciences. I've always heard people talk about admissions as if hard sciences got a bump. If that's not true, it almost seems foolish to major in something that requires labs unless that's your passion.
Ehh. As a chemist, I think that bias is unfounded. Then again, majoring in bio will probably make the first two years of med school easier since you've already had some upper level biology. That's the main advantage I can see.
Hard sciences are more time consuming from the standpoint of lab meetings, but they also tend require less writing.
Yes, the first two years of med school were more difficult, IMO. Not impossible but people with a science background definitely have a leg up, given the sheer volume of info you have to learn.
But if they are going to go to med school, what is the advantage they gained by going to a liberal arts school and majoring in art history? I think we just disagree fundamentally, I don't think there is generally inherent value in just going to college to learn. College is there to achieve a purpose and if you want to be a doctor, why get a degree in art history?
I think you're right. What should a doctor major in? They have 4 years to learn about medicine. Why not spend the other 4 learning about something they're interested in if the end result is the same? As long as they get the pre reqs for med school, no problem.
I was a double major (bio and Spanish language/linguistics). I fulfilled the requirement for the bio major but didn't go above and beyond. The language degree on the other hand I took a bunch of other classes in and spent all of my last semester of college in linguistics classes. I loved it for the sake of learning it and knew once I got to med school that opportunity would be gone. I would definitely encourage pre meds to study what they love in undergrad.
And FWIW, the science in med school is so different from what you encounter in undergrad that I really don't think my bio degree gave me a huge advantage to the history or English majors. We all had to complete the same science prereqs to get there in the first place.
We will absolutely shell out for an elite liberal arts college if our kids get in and want to go that route. And I am all for them majoring in what interests them rather than pursuing a major because of perceived employability. Neither H nor I majored in anything having to do with our careers. I am a big proponent of learning for learning's sake.
I am a big proponent of learning for learning's sake.
I agree--but do you think this is a viewpoint of the privileged? I rarely encounter someone outside of the upper middle or upper classes who views education in this way. (Do I need to zip up my flameproof suit here?)
I am a big proponent of learning for learning's sake.
I agree--but do you think this is a viewpoint of the privileged? I rarely encounter someone outside of the upper middle or upper classes who views education in this way. (Do I need to zip up my flameproof suit here?)
Yes, I think it is largely (though not exclusively) a viewpoint of the privileged. Easier to be all about the learning when you aren't trying to figure out how to put food on the table and all that. And less risky to major in something non-practical if you are at an elite college where prestige and alumni network alone goes a long way to ensuring gainful employment or if you plan to go to graduate or professional school anyway, both things that privileged kids are more likely than non-privileged kids to do.
I'm not surprised that my school didn't make the list. Most graduates go into non-profit, politics (campaign work, etc), social work and teaching. We are all about changing the world, not making money.