What is the most useless College Degree?

As a finance guy from a highly ranked business school and a recruiter at the junior level for an investment bank, I was glad to have pursued a variety of liberal arts courses as an undergrad (Phil. minor).

From my limited experience, a business major will have a 2-3 month advantage coming out of school compared to a student who studies, for example, English or History.

Business acumen is not rocket science. Almost all firms have training programs that will get new recruits up to speed. Sure, you can have a background in accounting and so on and so forth---but realistically, those skills are not hard to teach. Business is 1/3 the numbers and 3/4 the relationships you build.

I think firms would like to see more college graduates who can think and be creative rather than someone who is specialized at an early level. Go for what you love to do, everything else will fall into place if you can do what you love to do well.

As for learning "something", it depends on what you place value on. Studying "Classical works of East Asian scholars in the 3rd century" might not be as pragmatic as "Intermediate Corporate Accounting", but college is one of the few places where you can pursue your interests on an in-depth level. My 2c.

 

One thing history *does* do is teach you how to write and reason. (Unless, of course, you download all your papers from the internet.)

 

The person who stated that philosophy is a bad degree to pursue is simply wrong. Yes, it's necessary to go to grad school with it. However, law schools prefer philosophy degrees to any other type of degree. Philosophy teaches one how to reason in a manner that is objective, but also teaches the limits of objectivity. Philosophy majors generally have proficient writing skills as well.

It wasn't my major... but it was my minor. And as far as the ability to think goes... I learned far more from philosophy than political science.

Political science is an extremely poor degree. It does help one develop writing and research skills - but it doesn't really prepare you for much in the market. And unfortunately, law schools are saturated with poli sci majors.

If I had to do it over again, I'd have majored in philosophy and minored in political science. I only ended up one credit short of a philospohy major, anyway . Supposedly, employers actually look at the courses you took more than the degrees... but I'll believe it when I'm doing the hiring .

 

Was that a joke or just a typo (or is there some overlap between the numbers and the relationships)?

 

I challenge you Behad!

I have a BA in Classics, and 1/2 a MA in Classical Art History, before I dropped out (read...Fs) to print underground arts/advert papers and play in a punk band.

There is not one whit of job value to those "accomplishments". However, at trivial pursuit, B.C. edition, I rule!

Thank God for Real Estate trade school and the Appraisal Institute.



p

 

1/4 and 3/4. [shaking head in disbelief].

 

Now that is funny.

 

My undergrad degree is History. I also had enough hours to major in Philosophy. My minor is English. On top of that, I have an MA in US History. At first glance, it may not seem like I use my degrees much, but there is no substitute for critical thinking, writing well (and writing well at different levels as the situation demands), the ability to logically defend or attack positions, speak extemporaneously, and research issues. In addition, my degrees have given me the sociological, historical, and geographical background and understanding that is essential to my success as I travel around the country and work with communities affected by fires and natural disasters.

My education also taught me what I don't know, and this simple bit of knowledge seems to be evading a large section of our population these days.

I think that anyone who really wants to go into management/leadership needs to read a bunch of history. It's a lot more fun reading about about Alexander the Great or Huey Long or Napoleon or Charles Houston than it is reading some dreadfully boring business tome that tries to quantify the unquantifiable or make points based on coincidences or anecdotes. Plus, you learn a great deal more if you know enough to put things in perspective and can evaluate the actions critically.

Aditionally, it seems like liberal arts folks generally handle change easier and more gracefully than those with "vocational" or "process" degrees. I think most LA folks realize that in life you never stop pursuing education. In some of the other degree programs, the general tendency is to think your education stops with the degree.

Oh yes, and even with some time off for a new baby, I'll crack six figures this year... not bad for a grad student in History. Finally, even though I will never be a millionaire or exert power over lots of people, or do some of the other things that society calls success, I am genuinely happy with my career, education, and personal (my wife also has an MA in History!) choices.

 

Now we know why all these dot-coms went bust!!!!

 

Wharton? What do you think about the latest rankings?

 

right now I'm thinking that i'm double majoring in biology and economics..... hopefully coming from this university with that should be able to get me into a good grad school...... well it better!

 

I may be misunderstanding you -- and going off on another tangent -- but I think it's the theory in a computer science degree that makes it less vocational. A lot of the vocational stuff you need to know to get a job after earning the CS degree (e.g., Java/J2EE or Win APIs, Unix skills, Oracle knowledge, GUI development skills, practical network/TCPIP skills, and other platform/application-specific crap) are things that aren't taught in your typical CS curriculum (at least at UT-Austin). The theoretical stuff you are taught, like logic/set theory, recurrence relations, induction proofs, OS and network theory, complexity, algorithms, thinking in terms of abstractions, and reasoning rigorously -- to name just a few -- that's the non-vocational stuff that distinguishes an engineer with a CS background from less-formally trained IT workers.

Not that theoretical rigor -- while it is non-vocational -- really has anything to do with the larger issues of self-discovery, a well-rounded education, writing and communication ability, other "soft skills" needed to succeed in the business world, and general happiness with what you do.

Hell, it doesn't even guarantee that you'll be a good software engineer, seeing the lousy code I've seen done by some CS guys. And one of the best software engineers I've worked with was a guy who majored in psych. But he did take quite a few CS courses, and he was an older guy, starting his career earlier too. I think for younger people coming out of school now without a specialized degree, it will be considerably harder breaking into specialized fields than for older people who did the same in years past.

 

Underwater basket weaving