I spent the morninig laughing and being intrigued by a book called Worthless: The Indispensable Guide to Choosing the Right Major by a guy named Aaron Clarey. On the back of the book is picture that (I assume) is Clarey louging on what looks like the beach with an Army t-shirt on smoking a big cigar. This is the guy who is going to give you or your kid some good practical advice on how to pick a major in college.
The book takes aim at “Big Education” and in non-PC terms lets the reader know what is happening inside higher ed. Clarey has a wicked sense of humor and his graphs and charts just add to the fun. There is one that shows the breakdown of what he calls “worthless degrees.” “Nearly 70% of worthless degrees are awarded to women” he states along with a chart showing the breakdown of 68% of women to 32% of males who get these worthless degrees. Worthless degrees include those such as Women’s studies, sociology, philosophy, psychology, education and the liberal arts and humanities. In other words, those majors that avoid math.
It does seem to me at times that colleges are becoming finishing schools for women. I wonder if this is why many men avoid them?
Categories: Humor, PJ Lifestyle Columns
Pretty much. Then they’re out at Occupy Wall Street demanding a six-figure job with their “degree” because they have outrageous student loans to pay…
A female misogynist is such a sad thing.
Sad for the ugly left perhaps. Get used to it.
A leftist fool is a particularly sad thing.
A leftist fool is a normal thing…. FTFY.
I don’t know, I was one of those women who got a “worthless” degree, and now, after 20 years of repaying my student loan, I think Dr. Smith is on to something.
Correction : A female who is actually fair to men, is a beautiful thing.
Everyone here needs to read ‘The Misandry Bubble’. It is the ‘mother’ of all anti-feminist essays.
– been more ill-mannered.
2. Blackgriffin
Dude, in order to get some sex you have to make sure that lots of women see you saying things like that.
Nah, no sex comes of that sort of lickspittle act. But he can be “good friends” with lots of campus gals, who will sob to him every time their bad boy boyfriend tells them to shut up. lol
I agree. Sucking up to women is revolting to women. It is amazing that some men still have not figured that out, despite tons of websites exploring this in great detail.
BlackGriffin is part of the ‘third gender’ forming in the West.
I consider political correctness essentially a feminine phenomenon, part of the Oprahization of America. But PC’s natural partner is Marxist Critical Pedagogy, created by men such as the lamentable Paulo Friere of Brazil.
In a political sense, both phenomena emanate from the viewpoint of those who have traditionally thought of themselves as relegated to 2nd class status or in non-PC terms, losers. Although Brazil may be the most successful country in Latin America it is still a far cry from the easy success of America.
The point is that when we start taking our cues and lessons from politicized entities that seek to mitigate and explain away past failure by way of imposing words like social justice, racism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and exploitation rather than simply rising to the top as does creme, reality itself becomes a fantasy world where success is inverted.
Those groups who’ve never done anything in larger historical terms such as war, architecture, art, etc., put themselves forward as history’s unlucky and the top of that historical food chain as unwittingly lucky.
For 5 thousand years.
The unlucky rocket scientists of Haiti will watch and wait.
For another 5 thousand years. They’d already be another Easter Island if it weren’t for those lucky historical bastards.
Blackgriffin,
No, what is sad is that a majority of women are getting degrees that take up a lot of money and time and that don’t get them a good job. As Richard Fernandez just said in his recent column on colleges, “A worthless degree isn’t much of a right. It is hardly a ‘privilege.’” Try reading his column and taking a look at the picture of the woman with a masters and low employment to get a sense of why some liberal arts degees might not be the best move:
http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2012/02/09/by-rights/
On the other hand, a “worthless” degree is still better than no degree. In the business world and in government hiring, someone with a BA in Queer Studies is way ahead of someone with only a high school diploma. The fact is, it doesn’t matter what you major in. The important thing is the sheepskin, possession of which is supposed to prove something important about your character. I’ve never been quite clear on what.
Really? You’d hire Grievance Studies major over someone who might want to actually work?
There is the hope that the college graduate, even if they earned something as worthless as Women’s Studies or Education, did learn something along the way. Usually how to read and write suffices, but rarely more.
IQ tests would eliminate much of the need for college degrees. But they are illegal to administer since there is a disparate impact on minorities and the Supreme Court in all its brilliance could not figure out a relationship between a good worker and intelligence, though that does explain a lot of the decisions handed down from the 9 robed tyrants.
Anyone who gets a Grievance Study degree is likely to be a malcontent. Who would want to bring that into their organization?
Bugs,
I agree that a college diploma is better to have than not for the most part, but college is so sky high these days. If you spend $100,000 to get a BA in Queer Studies etc. and can’t get work, now you have a loan and no job.
But Helen, since Public Sector jobs pay more than private sector, AND such degrees are preferred by government employers rather than the fields studied by private sector workers, a degree in Queer Studies might in fact lead to a lucrative, recession-proof, power-wielding job in government.
In government, yes. I think this is going to change in the private sector. A smart employer will see someone with a degree in queer studies as a lawsuit waiting to happen. When your only qualification is a certificate of a chip on your shoulder, don’t be surprised is some don’t want you.
“certificate of a chip on your shoulder….’
BLOODY BRILLIANT
One wonders what the life experience requirement is for an equivalency degree in Queer Studies. Not me, of course, but I’m sure someone does; and would it get them hired more quickly.
About 10 years ago there was a report, which I probably saw on the BBC web site but I cannot remember, that said that people with a degree in English literature have an average income lower than that of people without university degrees (in the UK).
I believe there are no such things as degrees in Queer Studies outside North America, but presumably they are worth less than degrees in English lit, and a fortiori less than nothing; at least in the UK.
Hah. In government maybe, most government activities have
negative output anyway, so hiring incompetents is a great idea,
they do less damage.
However, try to get a STEM job (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math)
with a BA or MA or even a PhD in Blaggonomics Studies. Any course
or degree with the word “Studies” in it is ipso facto nonsense.
“However, try to get a STEM job (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math)
with a BA or MA or even a PhD in Blaggonomics Studies.”
Well, YEAH.
I’d rather have someone without a degree who shows ability than someone who spent their best opportunity for an education on “a certificate of a chip on [their] shoulder”.
If for no other reason, they may have been horribly miseducated in the realms of math, science, economics, and ethics.
perhaps in Fantasyland. Paying any money for an inferior education is stupid, and a waste. Better to invest that time and energy into something that will build a skill, that the person could then sell in the markeplace.
My daughter was on her way to a fully-paid for (by me) worthless degree in Women’s Studies before she figured out that she would get no work after graduation. Like magic, she shifted in her last 4 semesters to a degree in Econ with a minor in Math and, like magic, she has landed great jobs since then.
She now mentors students and advises them to ditch the worthless degrees….
The way your comment reads, it sounds as f you were giving her a blank check to get the crap degree, and she came to senses on her own.
You didn’t put your foot down in the first place?
ISTR these particular majors being called “MRS Degrees”.
Except there are few men at the colleges these women attend. At the liberal arts colleges my daughter toured this pat fall, the ration was nearly 2:1. The universities offering engineering and econ had evenly balanced sex ratios- fortunately for her, that’s where she’s likely going to end up as she’s interested in biotech- and if she does get her MRS degree it’s likely to be with a guy with a job. I call that a win-win-win.
Dr. Helen is not talking about the Bryn Mawrs, but the more common schools where women are getting to the 60%+ mark.
Regarding MRS, whether or not she gets engaged before she graduates (the old version of it) she still raises her attractiveness later to college educated men who are achieving.
Not with a Grievance Studies degree she’s not.
Same as it ever was: many women still go to college to get their Mrs. degree.
And that would be wrong because …? I fully realize this comment is pure-t snark guaranteed to be nothing but inflammatory, but I’ll bite.
Remember, human brains haven’t really evolved past where we were 50K +/- yrs. ago. Oh yes, we’ve certainly learned how to USE it better, but for all that it hasn’t changed much. Men & women both use college and leaving home (i.e. the “tribe”) to find a mate. Not necessarily on purpose, there is a lot to be said for a sheepskin, altho prob. not so much in “_____ Studies”. But in a tribal society (which is where our brains live) after a while you know what too much inbreeding leads to, so there must be an infusion of fresh bloodlines. Biologically it makes all kinds of good sense to find a mate away from one’s home turf.
Spending $100,000 for a degree in Queer Studies is indeed a bad idea. But getting a BA in, say, history or Spanish from the nearby state school while living at home? Nothing wrong with that. The false choice isn’t between a lot of money for a “worthless” degree or not going (or majoring in something for which you have no aptitude); it’s finding a way to major in what interests you, obtain some skills in, say, research and writing, or foreign languages, and doing it for a more acceptable total cost.
That’s what I did – lived at home, went to a local CC and then to a relatively no-name state university for a degree in English, which I viewed basically as a starting point for what I wanted to do do. At the time that I got the degree, it did guarantee that I was fairly literate, could produce written material in a wide variety of styles, was acquainted with good spelling and grammar, could do original research, had a good grounding in history, and was familiar with a variety of arts and sciences. I certainly got no cachet out of having gone to that school, but I did get a good education, and at very little cost.
Interesting that you could actually learn to write in an English department. It must have been an “old school” department that emphasized English rather than oppression via race, gender and class. KUDOS. By learning to write, you learned to think–a dangerous ability.
Oh, it was definitly old-school: pretty small classes, pretty much taught by full professors, and a minimum of grievance studies. Some of them may have been offered, given that this was post-60s, but I wasn’t interested. I graduated from it in 1976, which probably accounts for the relatively high quality of the school.
Isn’t what you did what high school should do for free?
No. K-12 schools are where feminists collect hefty paychecks for an easy job with short hours, protected by a powerful union, while still claiming to be underpaid. If you are fortunate, your son gets through this without a female teacher using him for sex.
College, is where the female students who graduate from high school go on to get the credential to become recipients of a public sector salary themselves, often as teachers.
Now, if you want your child to actually learn something, that too for almost no cost, go to Khan Academy or MITx.
High school isn’t free. Someone has to pay for it, just not the students in attendance.
People seem to forget this. A lot.
And yes, high schools ought to teach the basics to students, or else not graduate them.
I agree, but also favor the other economic extreme, at least for the lucky few that can pull it off. It might be worth the risk of paying top dollar for a humanities degree if you get it from an elite institution. It’s the middle path where most humanities majors end up- high cost, questionable quality- that is the problem.
I dunno, Leigh. Ex b-i-l had MA in history, and lived at home while attending state U, at least for undergrad. What does one do with history except teach? (which he didn’t want to do) He started waiting tables to pay for MA, and after getting degree, spent a few yrs. in a low-paying job he hated. Ended up a waiter for next 35 yrs. (granted, he was very good and worked in chi-chi places). Said it was more $$, and more fun.
Why did he get an M.A. in history, if he didn’t want to teach? It sounds like he didn’t do any research on what the degree was or would offer, not that majoring in history itself was a bad choice.
I know it’s what gave me pause, nearly 20 years ago, that the female profs were getting up, and being so straight-forward about how one used this degree- an art history major was for getting married, and then enjoying one’s vacations in Europe, visiting museums. The ARH degree poshed one up a bit, and a pre-med student would marry you, as if acquiring a vase. Then you’d volunteer among other ARH majors at acceptable charities, raise children, and enjoy ones vacations. They were very definite about this.
It was dizzying. I wanted a degree that I could stand on my own two feet with, and then marry whom I desired, and have a happy life, not whiling my time away from vacation to vacation.
And, well, doctors can easily divorce their wives. I’d seen it happen. It seemed like a terrible life plan.
Now, granted, I haven’t a degree, and I’m not likely to head to Europe, and I do depend on my husband for his financial acumen, so maybe I ought have listened with less skeptical and blue-collar ears.
Ari, there’s a big difference in the calculus that the ‘academic woman’ doesn’t tell you, though. In their world, the wife is something that a man loves to display. In your world, a wife is something that a man loves.
Luckily for me, in my world it’s both!
Enough already with the “worthless degrees.” Some are, some aren’t. Dr. Helen herself no doubt majored in psychology, seeing as she has two graduate degrees in the subject, too. So worthless? No.
I myself majored in philosophy. Have never lacked for a job in the 30 years since I graduated, and the four years I spent learning to think deeply and critically about a subject prepared me very well for my chosen career field, journalism. (It provides, among other things, a healthy baloney detector.)
There is more to life than the STEM degrees. It takes all types to make up a good society. As a rule, I think, if the major was invented in the last 30 or so years (Women’s Studies, Peace Studies, etc.) it’s probably not really a deep academic subject. If the major was part of the true liberal arts education of centuries past (languages, philosophy, theology, science), then it’s a worthwhile degree–assuming, of course, that the subject hasn’t been watered down by the aforementioned political correctness.
“Enough already with the “worthless degrees.” Some are, some aren’t. Dr. Helen herself no doubt majored in psychology, seeing as she has two graduate degrees in the subject, too. So worthless? No.”
Worthless. No solid foundations. Subject to political winds. Basically in its infancy. Dr. Smith makes her living outside her field, more as a pundit, than as a psychologist. Same with Dr. Krauthammer. Greater success outside their fields.
“I myself majored in philosophy. Have never lacked for a job in the 30 years since I graduated, and the four years I spent learning to think deeply and critically about a subject prepared me very well for my chosen career field, journalism. (It provides, among other things, a healthy baloney detector.)”
You were educated back in the day before journalism school. That was back when journalists had to know things. You had a classical education, which left you well-rounded, capable of critical thinking, and capable of stringing two sentences together.
“There is more to life than the STEM degrees. It takes all types to make up a good society. As a rule, I think, if the major was invented in the last 30 or so years (Women’s Studies, Peace Studies, etc.) it’s probably not really a deep academic subject. If the major was part of the true liberal arts education of centuries past (languages, philosophy, theology, science), then it’s a worthwhile degree–assuming, of course, that the subject hasn’t been watered down by the aforementioned political correctness.”
Yes, there is more to life than STEM, but those other things always take a backseat to STEM, because they are only made possible by the success of STEM. Industry, productions of tangible things, comes first. Only after the necessities are provided can we look for luxuries.
It helped, Marc, that you graduated 30 years ago. The situation for non-STEM graduates has deteriorated steadily for the last 40 years or so. Certainly when the economy is good and hiring is strong graduates in most fields can find a job and once on the payroll can flourish if they have what it takes. But more and more often, the job market is weak and non-STEM majors have trouble getting in the door.
When I finished school, just after the Second Crusade, anyone with a degree was a hot job prospect. In those days not everybody could go to college, or even finish high school, and degreed people were all considered management candidates by businesses. I graduated in the ’60s with a BA in Economics from a well known school. Alas my draft lottery number was low, so I went into the Navy for five years. When I emerged, there was no longer a shortage of college graduates, just the opposite, in fact, so job prospects were dim. Some may recall the ’70s were not the best of times, either. I had to go back to school and retread. Same for my wife. We were thirty (30) and thirty-two (32) years of age respectively when we began our ultimate careers.
But we learned our lesson well, and we passed it along. We raised an EE and a CPA whose job prospects have been nothing less than stellar even in the past few years of high unemployment. Maybe they missed something because they can’t tell you much about the Cathedral of Chartres, but they have good jobs and someday may very well get to go visit there.
In a better world one could pursue a course of study for no reason other than the intellectual challenge and cultural enhancement. But in the world in which we actually live, young collegiates would be well advised to take care of business first.
I have quite a few “worthless” degrees myself. There is something to be said about pursuit of knowledge, although a college student today will had difficult time finding good professors.
These degrees are not “worthless”, they are overpriced.
I’d agree. Clarey seems clearly to be defining the worthiness of the degree in terms of financial net worth; some of the “worthless” degrees are useful that way, for some individuals.
A problem is that most students don’t know what careers would best comport with their characters and aptitudes before they go to college, so they don’t pick the practical “worthy” degrees that might be worth the money they’ll spend.
Note, some of those “worthless” studies have non-monetary personal utility, i.e. in being a good citizen, good leader, enjoying life more, etc. Those are, essentially, intellectual luxuries.
And I think we don’t do a good job of differentiating between the things the academy can provide that you’ll need to make a living, and the things you’ll want to improve your life.
Some of the smartest and most creative people I’ve known in software had degrees in Philosophy or Cognitive Science. God help us when the “there’s an algorithmic solution for every problem” type of technocrat can tell everyone what constitutes a useful degree.
I guess no one ever enjoyed good plays, movies, or paintings. And there’s no real skill or knowledge involved in creating them. Writers wouldn’t benefit from having read and studied the greats who came before them. Knowledge only benefits those with technical degrees. I’d hire a thoughtful, hardworking philosophy major who understands logic over a techno dude who spent all his free time gaming and partying.
Rather than painting all non-technical degrees as useless in one broad stroke, keep on fighting the good fight against credential mills and lowered standards. That I can respect.
So tell us all: which PhD. did Michaelangelo have? Where did da Vinci get his doctorate? Raphael: women’s studies major?
No one is suggesting that there aren’t very bright and interesting people in the social sciences. I’ll go further and suggest that most here would agree that it’s a great idea to expose most college kids to literature, philosophy,history, and the arts (although the heavy Marxist indoctrination has really got to go).
It’s just that society doesn’t need very many people with these degrees, there are already plenty of them, and the market isn’t willing to pay them nearly what their education cost them.
Back when a degree was relatively inexpensive, liberal arts degrees could be used as a credential that certified a graduate as a reasonably capable person suitable for various starter jobs. But with such degrees going from a quarter million dollars on up, a graduate cannot afford to take the starter jobs they are offered.
Thus most serious people knowing that they will need to earn a living go into more pedestrian endeavors like business, medicine, science and engineering.
I have to agree with your other commenter — relatively few high profile novelists, either ‘literary’ or bestseller, were creative writing or literature majors.
Same goes for musicians.
DaveP beat me to this point, but I’ll add it anyway. As a faculty member in chemistry I was dragooned into serving on a committee awarding scholarships across all disciplines. One candidate’s scholarly work involved an excruciatingly detailed exegesis of the work of some deservedly obscure Renaissance Italian poet. (Full disclosure: I was a literature minor in college.)
In response to my query as to the point of this exercise in literary criticism, she wrapped herself in the flag, avering that great literature was its own reward, etc. I pointed out that 1) she was not writing literature, but rather literary criticism, and 2) that Shakespeare did not have a degree in literature, English, or literary criticism, yet he was a pretty fair country writer.
Afterwards one of my arts colleagues told me I was a fierce interogator.
A worthless degree is one which imparts no skills of value. It is a piece of paper that may make the person who receives the paper feel good, but those are also the folks that wind up as OWS types.
The OWS poster child is the guy who ranted about being $250,000 in debt for an advanced (PhD?) degree in film criticism.
Note: not making films. Not writing them. Criticizing them.
Here, here, Alex!
It’s inexpensive to run an English dept. All you need are paper, pens, books and a trash can.
It’s even more inexpensive to run a Philosophy dept. You can omit the trash can.
HAHA. That’s very funny.
I just finished reading “Worthless”. According to the author, a bachelor’s degree in Psychology is useless, and a masters is next to useless. Only with a PhD does a Psychology degree become useful.
Finishing schools traditionally taught their students poise, grace, and manners. If higher ed is actually a finishing school for women, it’s an exceptionally poor one.
I agree. They do not receive education, but indoctrination masquerading as education.
Feminism has pushed back the moral and intellectual progress of Western Women by centuries.
Wouldn’t it be great if somebody would write a satirical novel lampooning higher ed? Something like Bias Incident: The World’s Most Politically Incorrect Novel?
Wait, I already did that. I sent a copy to your husband.
Already done. See David Lodge “Trading Places”
Okay Buzz has a point about psychology degree or a classical liberal art degree. But watching a show on cable over this weekend about flying in Alaska, I saw this lady who was learning to become a bush pilot. I was paying attention until they filmed the flight instructor teaching her to shoot a gun to defend against bears. She admitted that she never shoot a gun and she was against guns because she had a “Peace Study” degree at an east coast university. What the hell is Peace Study? Now that is a worthless degree.
Canada lost an inordinate number of its men to incompetent British commanders. Rather than army up themselves, they created Peace Studies as a way to diffuse situations before they grew bellicose. It’s international relations, history (one hopes) from the governmental side of things, rather than the trade side of things.
Since Canada is committed to being multicultural, welcoming to homosexuals, and hostile to traditional religions- there are provinces with no Catholic Churches, despite Canada being settled by very religious French people- you can hear what the UN will sound like in 50 years, by reading their daily papers. Mark Steyn got sued in Canada, his straightforward reporting of Muslim beliefs being considered provocative.
She’ll be a Peace Studies major until that first bear starts snapping at her ass, at which point she will race for the gun.
Alaskan bears love people with peace studies degrees. They taste just like chicken.
Well, if I could be 18 again and returning to good ‘ol Depauw, a high female to male ratio would not be a drawback in my mind. Frankly, I could not believe how much attention a nerdy book-jock received from beautiful young women in the early 80s.
How about the high sexual harassment lawsuit ratio ? The Yale star quarterback who chose to play the Harvard-Yale game instead of a Rhodes scholarship just got hit with an anonymous accusation and his life is ruined. I’ll take my college experience in the 1950s, thank you. Didn’t get laid much but didn’t get sued or worse, accused of something with no chance of defending myself.
Education are well paid. So we were told here when Brad Pitt said otherwise.
psychology? there a jobs for them specially at HHRR so no worthless .
Humanities? were as some else said up, the trivium was the basis of education. And was the education recieved by the giants over whose shoulders we stand
Matt Damon, actually.
The “worthless degrees” are overpriced and infected with Marxist nonsense. But the humanities themselves, as previously taught, are very good things and really what it means to be educated.
BTW, the biggest load of crap in any of my years of education were the education courses. They tried to teach us that we had nothing to teach students, even grammar, since that amounted to politically imposing your worldview on students. Students would invent their own writing and grammar, and who were we to say it was wrong? I left.
I have a slight objection to his section on law school–he portrays all lawyers as liberal arts majors looking to kill time, when only most are that way. Law school is very much like undergrad here, and if you focus on specialties that are rigorous and in demand, you’ll do fine. Things like securities, intellectual property, antitrust, corporate structuring, mergers and acquisitions, etc.
Otherwise, law specializations fall into the same types of groups as undergrad degrees:
1. Specializations like constitutional law, civil rights, and (God help us) environmental law, along with any of the interdisciplinary legal fields, are like philosophy–interesting, but in much lower demand than necessary to make the field lucrative.
2. Specializations like small scale litigation, criminal law, and family law require experience more than elite education; they’re the equivalent of journalism degrees. Go to a local school, work as an associate for a small firm for a few years, and hang out your own shingle.
I know LOTS of reasonably smart people who blundered through college and then later decided that law school was the only way, with their path of least resistance BA, to try to get that upper middle class lifestyle.
My daughter chose to attend a liberal arts college. She wisely double majored, one hard science and one soft. Guess which one got her a well paying job?
I’m sure my daughter will be doing that, as well. I think BA/BS degrees are very complimentary. My own personal combo that was very useful was biology/philosophy. With that, I attended medical school, so I guess it paid off.
Having gone to a liberal arts institution as an undergrad, and then spent my career at large state universities, I would argue against the simple minded distinction between “worthless” and “worthwhile” degrees proffered above – from either a purely utilitarian or intellectual standpoint. Certainly, one can question the value of programs in “Women’s Studies,” etc.; however, I teach at an institution which offers degrees in “Sales,” “Sports Management,” and other “niche” degrees. Such degrees may lead to easy placement right out of college, but their narrow scope decreases the flexibility and adaptability of the students involved. The number of young people that end up on a career path at 30 that differs from the one they thought they would pursue at 20 is not insignificant. These kinds of niche degrees are as much an act of academic malpractice as handing out a degree in Women’s Studies. Further, the argument given for creating such “practical” courses of study often amounts to the idea that we are being responsive and market-driven; however, the additional value-added of such a degree over more general professional majors is marginal, at best. I think what’s really going on, whether one is speaking of Women’s studies or Sports management, is political log-rolling by the faculty – creating a situation where it not only gives the faculty control over their own little “fiefdom” but makes it ever more difficult to evaluate the quality and value of the curriculum in question.
The only issue I have with this is characterizing “education” as a worthless degree. Education is a valid subject of study, valid career choice and a noble occupation despite any issues with teacher performance, low pay, unions, etc. Some of the others (psychology) don’t really kick in in terms of value until you complete work at least at the graduate level. Oh, add add political science to the list. I loved it as an undergrad, but its totally unmarketable.
The only issue I have with this is characterizing “education” as a worthless degree. Education is a valid subject of study, valid career choice and a noble occupation despite any issues with teacher performance, low pay, unions, etc.
Pedagogy is necessary, as it it is not intuitively obvious how to teach a given subject to a given group of people. Unfortunately, the Ed Schools concentrate not on pedagogy but on 1)Politically correct nonsense or 2) the latest new [but neither proved nor researched] New Big Education Theory Which Will Explain Everything and Obliterate All Previous Education Theories. Unfortunately the NBETWWEEaOAPET is taught to Ed School students before it has been researched. Five years later, it is abandoned for the next new [but neither proved nor researched] NBETWWEEaOAPET.
Given the nonsense that the Ed Schools teach, it is amazing anyone succeeds as a teacher. New teachers succeed in spite of what they have learned in Ed School, not because of what they have learned in Ed School.
I’m convinced that the entirety of “education” school curriculum is intended to cripple the ability to teach.
My daughter, who graduated a year and a half ago with a BA in a “worthless” major, psychology, got a job with a hot start up company in Seattle and is doing very well. My other daughter is also pursuing the same “worthless” major: psychology. She intends to get a PhD and become a psychotherapist. But yeah, she’ll never get a job because she didn’t get a major that involved math. Like, say economics.
Of course, my kids has slacker parents to take after. My wife was a Psych major and has had a successful career as a psychotherapist. Me, I was a philosophy major. I graduated at the top of my law school class, had a successful law career, went into business and became independently wealthy. I retired early. All in all, my family seems to be doing OK with our worthless degreees.
I agree that “Grievance Studies”-type majors are worthless because they teach neither useful content,useful skills (like genuinely critical thinking—come to think of it, philosophy probably doesn’t even teach that any more) nor a grown up world outlook. But math is not the only useful skill for the future, however underrepresented it may be at the moment in total college majors graduated.
Sorry, but the larger point still stands:
a 4yr-only psych/communications/sociology degree IS generally worthless, in part precisely because only the follow on advanced degree is enough to make it stand out.
The fact that these degree are prerequisites for advanced degrees is what makes them useful. If you haven’t gotten a degree in psychology at the bachelors level you won’t be able to get the masters and the PhD degree without doing the core work before you can even start working on the advanced degrees. Your choice get the “worthless” degree that technocrats sneer at or get some other degree and take those same core courses before you start an advanced degree in those fields, which is more “worthless”? In addition, there are jobs available for just the bachelors level for all three of these disciplines. Not a huge number, but they are out there.
One problem is that “core” courses have been eliminated at most liberal arts departments. Also you have professors who never learned to write well or think critically so they can’t teach what they don’t know. Even for STEM students it may be wise to bypass the “prestige” school that is supposed to turn out quality students. Often the way they do it is to half way instruct the students up until their junior year then throw them into a “required” course that graded in such a manner that at least 25% of them will fail. One old boy got smart and took all his math and science pre-requisites at a small liberal arts college, not a university. The professors at the small college were more interested in teaching than doing outside consult work or publishing stuff for show. After he got his B.A. he applied to Master’s in engineering program. Since the university got more money for upper graduate students they tried harder to retain them and what few leveling courses he had to take were not graded on the weed out principle.
Been there. Done that. Wearing the women’s college ring to prove it.
But I didn’t waste my talents: a few years later, I earned an Associates in Computer Information Systems. Yes, I dealt with that dreaded math, but with a variation called Programming Logic and Language… make it three (C++, Java, Visual Basic.NET). Had lots of fun with it. The geeks were surprised to see me having fun with it.
I’m now a SAHM with two little ones. But I’ll be back.
And yes, my old degree was a complete waste of my time… and the government’s money.
Feminists today are all a bunch of p*****s. I was a feminist back in the 1970′s, when it meant something. Back then nothing burned my bra more than Barbie dolls saying, “Math is hard.” I went out and got a BSEE just to prove them wrong. I worked hard to prove that women were just as good at STEM studies as men, but for what. To hand over the feminist mantle to a bunch of silly little whiners pursuing a useless ‘studies’ degree. Is this what feminism has become?
No kidding. I remember sitting in my high school typing class (I knew I’d need to write lots of papers in college if I was ever going to get to med school) and I remember watching a video about how to dress for work. Know what the reward was for the hard-working, appropriately dressed secretary? She got to marry the boss!
Talking Barbie was a 1990s phenom and she said “Math class is tough.”
People who know the facts aren’t feminists.
#sportutegirl,
It’s worse than you know! (more on that in a sec) Late 70s, big public argument w/dad when shopping on vaca. He bought a shirt & wanted to wear it that night, so clerk called someone to iron it. Out came a guy; dad asked, “Don’t you have a WOMAN to iron it?” Talk about burning my bra! I asked him if he thought women had a special “ironing gene”? It’s all about what you study, learn & practice, regardless of what that might be.
Anyway. Now middle-aged, rtng to univ. (finally) to finish my degree & strtg MA. For AHUM core class, chose “Pop Culture”. (It was a hoot, as I could direct the discussion the way *I* wanted it to go, instead of claptrap
You would not believe what the girls — NOT women — had to say, esp. about “roles”. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a man-hater, and delighted w/sex diffs. that make us so complimentary. But for instance: if after a few dates, a man asked you to do/iron his laundry, would you? Without hesitation they all said, “of course”. Wtf? So you’ll do it now, but what expectation does that set up? You’ll always do it, no matter how you’re treated. Good luck getting out of that; unless that’s what you want, o’course. What DID we fight & push for? All I ever wanted, in the above scenario, was 1) an explanation (“because I have to finish big paper”) and 2) a trade-off (“I’ll make sure to do this for you next week during your big paper”) These babies are going to get exactly the men they deserve, and you just know they’ll whine about that then, too.
Oy! nurturing is not an up-front mercenary exchange, when done correctly!
I scrubbed my boyfriend’s apartment down the second date, b/c I’d stayed over on the first date, and didn’t want to admit that I’d stayed in such squalid surroundings in the first place. This included a good half hour of elbow grease on the toilet, on hardwater rings.
He’s now my husband, and he’s given me everything I ever wanted and thought I couldn’t have- three beautiful children. Yes- I stay home and still scrub and do laundry- but I’m doing it at ten in the morning, not getting up and driving to an office. I get to volunteer at school, he’s bought me three vehicles at this point, he brought home candy last night, I get to spend time reading art books. He’s got insurance arranged so that if he’s not around, we’ll still be okay financially.
It’s not what I planned, it’s not how I was raised- my family is all career women who admit to hating children and childcare- but it’s, for our family, a better life. I’ve had to read more challenging literature, research government policies, see more movies–engage in the world more- just to go to one particular playgroup.
Simple, daily caring got thrown out the window during the experiments of living la vida Betty Friedan. Those women are re-inventing a maternal, nurturing style that was told to sit down, shut up, and hide in the back of the bus for forty-plus years. So what if they iron his shirts? He’s working on working 70+ possibly lucrative hours and keeping her in dish soap and babies? So what? The culture war is over. How’s about a culture war fifties redux? It’s coming, whether you like it or not. I’ve got all the books for a women’s studies degreee- Rosie the Riveter went home and raised the kids. She used her work skills at home, in different ways than the men used their skills. It’s happening right now, anyway- there are mothers opening charter schools for their kids- relying on their work as accountants, teachers, medical administrators…..
I’m not sure if I would necessarily call the attraction of young women to these degrees as being related to “finishing school” or an “Mrs.” degree, at least not intentionally. Many students, male and female, come to college undecided. Male students, however, are culturally expected at some point to earn a living, while female students do not necessarily perceive themselves to eventually be a breadwinner. If the going gets tough in a STEM course (many women go into Bio, for example), or they lose interest, they tend to drift for a while and end up in a humanities degree. Male students might drift to Business majors. I would also add “Human Development” to the list of degrees that serve to catch those female drifters. Often, they are smart, but take the path of least resistance. Also, many of the young women I knew who followed that course were not going into debt–they were from relatively well-off families.
I would also add that smart, hard working students who come out of college with drive and intelligence (and a liberal arts degree) will do fine once they find direction. Unfortunately, many lack the drive and smarts, and many liberal arts programs are pretty weak and don’t encourage the kind of “critical thinking skills” (God, I hate that term) that they claim to inculcate. Megan McArdle, if I recall, was a Lit major. Exception rather than the rule, sure, but highly educated (and educable) people are in short supply in a variety of fields.
I’ve made the point several times recently that the triumphal tone in coverage of women becoming the majority in 4 year schools, should be undercut by the fact that the women are much more likely to go for the useless majors.
In fact it IS, to a great degree, the MRS degree,2.0.
It is odd to me that you describe the worthless majors as devoid of mathematics.
Sociology, Psychology, and Education all require statistics and thus do not avoid mathematics. Philosophy requires heavy doses of logic and often majors have an additional major in mathematics or physics. The liberal arts includes mathematics and science.
These fields are relying more heavily on statistics and mathematics than they did 20-30 years ago.
Perhaps your characterization reflects your own education in one of these worthless majors and not a comprehensive evaluation of them?
You’re talking about relatively small, mild doses of mathematics. It’s not comparable to what physicists, electrical engineers, and mathematicians have to learn.
I have seen what passes as Statistics 101 at liberal arts colleges. I have not, however, seen a philosophy major pass an upper level physics class. None of the physics majors I have interacted with during my 13 years in academia were pursuing a dual major in philosophy. While I’m aware that the plural of anecdote is not data, given the relative prevalence of philosophy majors and the relative paucity of physics majors, if any meaningful proportion of philosophy majors were pursuing a double major in physics I believe I would have noticed (indeed, if this were the case, the physics departments I have been part of would have been overrun with philosophy double majors).
So, suffice to say, I dispute your claim. My own (ongoing) experience with liberal arts education is that the vast majority of students, rather than including math and science in their education, do everything they possibly can to exclude them. And the schools aid and abet them in this task, by offering courses (such as astronomy, which I teach) which allow them to acquire the necessary coursework in the maths and sciences while having the minimum exposure possible to actual math or science.
“I have not, however, seen a philosophy major pass an upper level physics class.”
I have not seen a physics major who could pass an upper level philosophy class, either. YOu can build the bomb; you can’t tell us whether we should use it.
Just heard a story on the radio driving home about that Adele song that causes everyone to break out in tears. A physicist analyzed the sound waves and brain waves and found a correlation between certain notes, bended notes, and reactions in our brain’s limbic system.
The songwriter said the song was written and recorded as Adele was getting over a very bad break-up and she was heartbroken at the time, and that shows in the performance.
Now which explanation best subscribes reality as you experience it?
“Now which explanation best subscribes reality as you experience it?”
Both.
And a beautiful sunset is just the result of the relative motion of an orbiting, rotating planet in relationship to a mid-size star as the visible portion of the the electromagnetic spectrum eminating from that star is filtered through layers of an atmosphere consisting of oxygen, nitrogen, argon …
Physics is useful, but it’s not what makes us human.
OK, so there are such things as worthless degrees (pretty much anything called “____ Studies”). But the recipients of those degrees are a distinct minority. The traditional liberal arts are not worthless, although they aren’t credentials that lead directly to lucrative work.
The real problem is that a lot of people who probably shouldn’t be in college, and aren’t really up to the rigor of a 4-year degree are being admitted to college anyway. A slim majority of those are probably female. And the degrees those academically less-than-gifted individuals pursue are, rather obviously, “those majors that avoid math”.
It’s not only women. But it is finishing school for underachieving middle class children–of which I was one for several years. It wasn’t until I went back to grad school and merged my social science degree with something more relevant to the working world that I scraped myself out of weekday drudgery and my skillset became in-demand.
Why men avoid these colleges is an easy question to answer.
What man interested in good sex would want to immerse himself in a collegiate pool of women who would attend them?
Altho this is a flame-throwing, troll retard sentiment, your comment makes no sense, but instead shows your age. Boys that age aren’t interested in quality, but quantity. They don’t even know yet what constitutes “good” sex. Unfortunately many of them will arrest at this point anyway. Find another reason “men don’t attend these colleges”.
The tension here is between “education” and “training.” Law school, to the sorrow of some faculty at some of the snootier law schools in the country, is training. Medical school quite clearly is “training.” Architecture school is training. Engineering school is training. The good thing about training is that it immediately qualifies you for a specific job, assuming such jobs are available. (Not so many for lawyers these days.)
“Education” is a little more of a nebulous concept. It refers both to mastery of a body of knowledge — a sort of highbrow cultural literacy — as well as to acquisition — at a high level of proficiency — of a set of skills that are universally required for all non-physical employment. These skills are verbal: reading, writing, and speaking coherently; analysis, etc. and also, at a fairly elementary level, mathematical.
So, I would suggest that the content of one’s major is less important than how it is taught and whether, during the pursuit of that major, the student acquires the skills I mentioned. So, I would not say that English, history, philosophy, even sociology are “worthless” majors, even though they don’t train the student to do anything (other than, at the PhD level, teach those subjects and do research and writing within them). “Women’s studies” and similar trendy subjects don’t seem to be inherently less able to inculcate those skills, but I am tempted to suspect how much hard-headed analysis is going on in a “discipline” which already is so strongly associated with a particular point of view.
Finally, the other question that no one wants to talk about is whether different advice should be given to students at different universities. What’s good advice for an average student at Princeton might not be such good advice for an average student at a non-elite state university. Some 23% of this year’s graduating class at Princeton went to work in finance or “consulting,” and you can be sure that the vast majority were not math majors . . . and Princeton offers no “business” major of any kind. Probably more than a few of them were philosophy, English or history majors.
And to a great extent those Princeton liberal arts majors are trading on their alumni and family networks and NOT ‘critical thinking’.
I somewhat disagree with your comments on ‘training’ — engineering and software development, at the high end, are *creative* problem solving, not mere training.
OTOH I’d agree that 95% of M.D.s are in fact rigorous training — purely applied technology.
To the creativity of programming:
Imagine having to write a 250,000 line poem that has to accurately and completely describe a business process *AND* be understandable to the next programmer to come along *AND* having to finish it by the required deadline.
BTW — no typos or misspellings allowed.
Oh for FUCKS SAKE let’s fucking burn all the art, thinking, and culture from our records and resort to a ant-like mathematical existence.
We might as well lay down our fucking rifles and let any goddamned culture walk in and teach us the way to live–after all, what the hell is worth anything if all we need are raw numbers?
This is the most ignorant, idiotic, and inflammatory post I’ve seen in some time. Fucking idiot.
Maybe you’re the one who needs such a degree.
You should study science, so you could learn to think logically and not become so emotional.
Subject hit a little close to home, eh?
Most engineering students I knew had interests besides engineering. There were musicians, artists, poets, wanna-be-authors. None of them considered those worthless activities — but realized that they couldn’t necessary get a decent job in those fields, or didn’t care for the BS that dominates the college atmosphere in those fields, or just preferred applying their other skills to a more rigorous field of study.
Designing a circuit or writing a program is a lot like writing a haiku or sonnet — you have a structure you must follow, rules you must obey, but within those constraints your choices are INFINITE. At the end, you (likely) produce something that actually does something in the physical world.
I believe Aaron Clarey is Captain Capitalism: http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/
I believe he is, I should have known that as I have read his blog.
My daughter is pursuing one of the most worthless of all degrees, Film Studies, but at least she’s doing it at a reasonably priced state university, debt-free (so far). Her friend attends a very pricey women’s college but she is considering training as an auto mechanic after graduation. I told her, why waste two more years and $50K+ when you can get an associate’s degree and a really good job in the same time for a fraction of the cost? Now if only my daughter would develop an interest in, say, becoming an electrician.
Well, there was that flurry of stories over Christmas break about the Georgetown study that showed a higher employment rate for Art History majors than Architecture majors. I know which one parents THINK is going to be more useful, but the article caused a certain amount of tension around my Department of Art and Architecture.
I will say, I actually know fully employed people with each of the degrees that ya’ll have been ridiculing. They wouldn’t even get the interview without that degree. Yes, including a masters in puppet theatre. works in high-tech, industrial sales, now. has a house, multiple kids in private school, a well- educated wife with a masters in a “studies”—she’s a published author, noted professor, etc. the film studies masters is a textbook editor making buckets of money. the medieval studies major is a vice pres in a giant corporation. the econ major who went to law school lives in a house valued at more than I’ve ever made in my life, added up and doubled, and hobnobs with multi-millionaires on the weekend. His posh art interests enriched his life, and frankly, probably got his wife her last promotion.
the problem isn’t the degree- it’s the job market has shrunk pretty drastically, for one, and for two, a bunch of middle-class kids thought they deserved a place at the rich kids table. When, really, it looks like there’s a rich kids’ table, and they invite poor kids to spice things up.
Like finishing schools? Nonsense. Just consider:
Going to finishing school would: help women with opportunities to meet men, teach them to be refined and well-spoken, but provide little in the way of marketable skills.
Going to college in women’s studies: help women with opportunities to meet men, teach them to be bitter and angry, but provide little in the way of marketable skills.
See the difference?
I’d like to say 2 things, and I’ll try to keep it short, but you know us women …
1. I’m middle-aged and returning to Univ. to finish BA/start MA, at the same time. I started by majoring in “Human Communication”, but realized after a couple upper level classes what a bunch of claptrap it was. I had a prof. begin a class by having us read Kant, etc. for a few weeks. After a quiz, he said, “Don’t worry, the boring stuff is done. We’ll move on next week from these (ready?) DEAD, OLD WHITE GUYS”. This class was supposedly re: ethics in comm. Instead it was an exercise in ever finer navel-gazing. All about “authenticity” (how I’ve come to loathe that word) and what I can only call a 60′s slogan, “Be here now!” For instance, we spent days discussing the 9/11 story of the guy who stayed with a fat man who collapsed in a stairway and could go no further. He wouldn’t leave him (translation: couldn’t leave him to face death alone, despite the fact his weight was his problem, and his only). This story produced the expected oohs & aahs, then I asked, “What about how the fat man felt? Did he want the burden of the other man’s death on his conscience? What about the vows the other guy made to his wife & kids? Didn’t they have any validity, and his family 1st claim?” I’m not taking any side here, but for an ethics class I found it infuriating that the moral dilemma part of this equation was left totally untouched. Another class was (uh-oh) “Gender, Women & Comm.” We spent 2 wks. on the old Mary Tyler Moore show (just more misogyny) and how Jo from “Little Women” was a lesbian. Made me angry, then disgusted that so-called proof of Jo being a lesbian was based on nothing more than a ‘reinterpretation’ of her old-fashioned, Victorian manners. In this po-mo world, I guess anyone can say anything, and it has as much punch as anything else anyone else says; another take on the “there is no capital T truth”. What a crock. I switched major/minor, so now majoring in Cognitive Neuroscience, which altho it falls under the Psych. Dept., is a much better mix of hard/soft science. Not open to as much, “How does that make you FEEL?” And yes, I will have a wide range of jobs open to me. I actually returned to school so I could stop being passed over for promotion, and having to train bosses that weren’t nearly as intelligent, and had nowhere near the yrs. of direct exper. One can’t get by the HR people without a degree, no matter HOW smart/exprd. one is.
2. It used to be that ‘good’ women’s colleges were also known to be finishing schools. What’s wrong with that? The negative comments on here, mostly men, act as if getting an educ. along with refining one’s public persona is a stupid thing. I’d say it prob. costs more to do the later than the former! Early 40′s, my mom spent 1 1/2 yrs. at one of these schools before transfrng to a State U. They were actually being trained to be wives of high-powered men. They had to dress for dinner, learn to “turn the table”, wear gloves & hats at all times while outdoors (which the girls promptly ditched at the school gates when lvg.). However, they were also exposed to many cultural events, arts & extras that as mom used to say, “I wasn’t even smart enough to appreciate at that age!” She came from a middle-class background and while certainly had manners, not the kind that upper class people used (several classmates were daughters of senators, governors, etc. – she spent sev. wks. vaca at a Gov’s summer mansion) My point here is that training stuck with her, even tho she doubled majored in acctng/teaching. And of course passed it on to me. It’s a variation of the “fake it til ya make it” philosophy. If one acts a certain way (what is aspired to), it can help smooth the path to whatever one’s trying to achieve. But only if there’s something to back it up: education. In whatever it is.
The biggest distinction, as far as I can tell, between gentlemen & gentlewomen and others is that a gentleperson will not intentionally cause distress to another.
These comments, and the original post, are revealing for what they say about the contemporary mind. For the record, college, not just certain majors, is essentially worthless in all respects if the potential student is concerned only with employment. In virtually every occupation, essential knowledge is learned on the job. Only the fundamentals of every discipline need be known ahead of employment. These could easily be provided to high school students by expanding the number of years in attendance there. Vocational schools could also provide technical education beyond high school. Libraries have long been the source for people who wished to educate theselves. They are still indispensable. College provides an environment of unique quality for those who wish to, and have the capacity to, develop their minds beyond the collection of mere knowledge. A true college program attempts to impart, and inculcate a love for, the pursuit of wisdom. Though this pursuit should be for its own sake, it also provides a leadership class for a free people, not all of whom are prepared for such endeavors themselves.
To Jeff.
If you are talking about an old time humanities program, that concentrated on timeless things that are the foundation to our modern civilization, like the greeks and romans, the enlightenment, shakespeare, locke, adam smith, and other timeless great literature, you might actually have a point. You could get real wisdom out of that, and at least you would learn some of the time honored concepts that made our civilization great. Mind you, this sort of thing is not for everybody, but I agree it would be nice to have at least a few people that remembered where our civilization came from.
But much of the western hating programs, obscure naval gazing “literary criticism”, whatever studies, leftist claptrap, and leftist propaganda, that passes for humanities and socialogy today, does not impart any of the wisdom and leadership skills you describe. It only imparts a hatred for america, exagerated self importance, disdain for ordinary work, and a sense of greivance, that makes them less, not more likely, as an employment prospect, other than in a big gov agency dominated by leftists, or a leftist lobbying group. Until real humanities programs make a comeback, uncorrupted by the leftist hacks, I have to class humanities in the worthless category.
“NAVAL gazing”? You’re looking at ships & boats? Did you mean navEl, perhaps?
In the bad old days women in college were not expected to have their degree prepare them to work either. They went to college to marry a college guy. Now, with their courses teaching them how to hate men, they cant even do that anymore.
I agree that any major that does not require some real math courses is probably worthless.
I also agree the we need to change discrimination disparate impact law so businesses can give applicants basic skills tests, like IQ, ability to read, write, do basic math, and logically follow instructions. If that was allowed, a college degree would no longer be needed as a basic screening device, to certify that an applicant knows how to read. Then HS degrees, plus decent basic skills test scores, will be enough for many jobs. That will be the point when this worthless degree bubble finally bursts.
I know this may be foolishly simple, but would letting the market determine what degrees are worthwhile prove evidence enough as to what degree has worth and what degree doesn’t?
Criticize him as much as you want, and rationalize your own mistakes away, arguably the best chart in Clarey’s book in the starting salaries chart.
He’s not a nice man, but he’s a truthful man.
Which, actually, makes him nicer in the long run than any placating, self-rationalizing idealists we have here still stuck in the 60′s.
I am a pensioner who is persuing a BA in history, with a major in American history. I also hold a BS in business administration with an accounting major and spent most of my working life as an accountant. I believe from what I have seen of my classmates that the real problem with the “worthless” degrees is that the highschools are graduating hordes of students that are totally unprepaired for college and since the colleges are unwilling to flunk out most of their freshmen classes on a regular basis they water down the courses. Breaking the public teachers unions and ending social promotion would be a good start.