What’s a College Major Worth?

January 4, 2012, 4:22 pm

Ever since I read about the Chinese Ministry of Education’s decision to phase out college majors that don’t give graduates marketable skills, I’ve been pondering the parallels between China’s higher ed headaches and those of the United States. Both countries have pushed hard to send more students to college, on the theory that building human capital will advance individuals’ prospects in the labor market while simultaneously promoting national economic growth. Yet both now see a distressing number of college graduates without jobs. That’s in part because the skills they possess often don’t seem to match those that employers — at least those that are hiring — want from new recruits. So is China doing the right thing? And should the United States follow suit?

China’s move certainly hasn’t been applauded at home. According to this account in the Wall Street Journal, the ministry’s distinctly instrumental view of what college students should study has led to a variety of worries. There’s the possibility of gamesmanship — colleges that want to promote diverse subjects may deliberately misreport their graduates’ employment rates. There’s the concern that the policy will lead students to move away from subjects such as biology, which while not in high demand in the near-term are crucial to China’s vision of increased scientific prowess.

Perhaps most importantly, there’s the worry that restrictions on the study of, say, Russian (China’s Shenyang Norman University cut enrollment in its program in half, the Journal reports) send the wrong message about the value of non-vocational education. This at a moment when China is ever more conscious of the need to develop a more creative workforce, one capable of the innovative thinking for which the United States and China’s other economic rivals are known. Indeed, the new dictate on which majors are to be eliminated, or severely trimmed, contrasts strikingly with China’s creation of a small but growing number of undergraduate liberal-arts programs, aimed at molding original thinkers.

Where does the United States fit in this discussion? There has for some time been a marked separation in this country between two visions of college education (a subject thoughtfully explored by Louis Menand in a widely discussed New Yorker article last June). The first, broadly speaking, expects that undergraduates will acquire an important knowledge base and analytical habits of mind by engaging with classical texts, studying natural sciences, and so forth. The second sees particular value in the pursuit of labor market credentials in, say, crop science or accounting.

One year ago, I wrote that these two approaches need not be irrevocably opposed. A view of universities that sees their core purpose as driving economic growth (including graduating students with skills readily in demand in the marketplace) can coexist with one designed to foster the life of the mind. For one thing, liberal-arts students may well develop analytical skills that, while not vocational in a narrow sense, hold them in good stead in the professional world. Moreover, both kinds of education often take place within the same university — there are lots of places where students can major in Latin or in physical therapy. There is also plenty of room within a pluralistic postsecondary system for a variety institutions, each dedicated to its own distinct mission, whether overtly practical or not.

All this said, with unemployment high among college grads (and student debt mounting), it’s no wonder that students and parents are anxious about future employment prospects. Although college graduates continue to earn far more on average than Americans with only high-school diplomas, there’s growing evidence to substantiate the assumption that choice of major has a significant impact on earnings. A report last year from Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce found very high earnings gaps between engineering, computer science, and business graduates, at the high end of the salary range, and those with degrees in fields such as social work and education. Petroleum engineers, for instance, reported average annual earnings of $120,000, while psychologists averaged $29,000.

Stats like these shouldn’t be read as evidence that China’s rigid, top-down approach is a particularly useful model for the United States. Career-oriented education isn’t right for everyone, whether or not it leads to lucrative employment. Even a major that aims to impart practical skills may not make graduates rich (see social work and education, above). There’s a good case for studying cultural anthropology, just as there is for majoring in computer science. What’s crucial is that students pick their fields of study with eyes wide open. That includes knowing the facts about the near-, mid-, and long-term earnings disparities between different kinds of degrees – facts that have often been unavailable in the past. I don’t see why anyone should have a major problem with that.

This entry was posted in China. Bookmark the permalink.

E-mail

sciencegrad

I am strongly opposed to China’s actions to discourage majors that are not apparently immediately employable. Unfortunately, the issue is complicated in China and the US. With student loans at an all-time high, many taxpayers are opposed to the “fluffy” degrees that don’t necessarily lead to a stable career and many politicians are quick to jump aboard and discourage these majors.

One thing I would like to suggest is that someone – be it the professors, career services, academic advisors, etc – help students understand how versatile a bachelor’s degree can be, regardless of the major. Students need to know how to highlight the benefits of their degree on a resume and cover letter. Perhaps the easiest strength for many of the liberal arts majors is their written, and sometimes verbal, communication skills. Nearly every job opening I’ve seen asks for excellent communication skills, but how many people actually address this requirement in their cover letter? I have a BA in the humanities and a BS in the applied sciences and I have noticed a difference in my job search process when I specifically highlight my writing experience up there with my technical skills. Each interview I’ve had since I added that to my resume focused quite heavily on these communication skills and they have been quite helpful in getting me jobs.
commserver

What is the purpose of college education? Is it a stepping stone for getting a job or for knowledge?

The original colleges were for the acquiring of knowledge. Very few people went to college, as opposed to today where it seems everyone wants to go to college.

Today you have liberal arts schools where students are encouraged to learn. My daughter goes to William College which uses the 4-1-4 system. There is winter intersession where students are encouraged to take courses that they might not have considered taking.

For job training then it is important to go to those institutions where students can be trained.

My wife is from China. She has relative who has degree in Computer Technology but having a hard time getting job that is relevant. He was offerred job as telephone answerer answering general questions. How important was it getting college degree in Computer Technology if the job he has isn’t even related to the degree?

My wife has friends whose children have similar experiences. There is one child who has degree in biology but the only job available was a salesperson for real estate. What a waste!!!!!

The problem in China isn’t the degree but the job prospects. There are too many college graduates but too few jobs. The number of jobs that are being created is low in comparison to the number of college graduates evey year. It has been estimated that there will be around 6.6 million newly minted college graduates in China in 2011.

http://www.econmatters.com/2011/07/college-graduates-too-many-in-china-not.html

Look at the following

Indeed, China is the largest developing country in the world far from being fully industrialized, and lacks the necessary infrastructure to properly place these highly educated young people. The nation owes much of its GDP (and therefore new jobs) to the manufacturing, industrial, and exporting sector, which mostly have more openings for blue collar workers instead of white collar jobs. There are simply more of them than jobs that they are qualified for, and the lack of affordable housing also has contributed to the “Ant Tribes” formation. Furthermore, due to the imbalance of social and economic development between urban and rural areas, ‘’Ant Tribes’ are clustered around major coastal regions like Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, whereas rural areas, especially in the western regions, where work environment can be difficult, have a much higher demand for college graduates.

It therefore seems that China simply doesn’t have the number of jobs available.
mycantarella

This is a balanced response. I value that. Among my own observations are that upper class, predominantly white students who attend liberal arts colleges and major in whatever, ultimately rule the world. That is to say, the broad based skills they acquire provide them with the intellectual agility to navigate a changing work environment more easily and therefore progress with more options. Whereas the students who, primarily low-income, first generation and minority, coming from underperforming K-!2 environments are not only challenged by college but also are more invested in the linear career pathway. They then turn to highly vocational programs like medical coding, which while a useful skill, is not on a par with the broad skills learned as a history major who can then navigate many career paths using the research, communications, and critical thinking skills that major has provided. It would help considerably if we were to be more explicit in explaining to all students what the value is in the varied majors they may choose. Keep in mind that the canon of majors has not changed dramatically in 4 year schools while the array of careers available and embraced has. Furthermore few engage in careers that reflect their majors. How does that happen unless there is inherent value in the SKILLS gained. But in the current environment we need to speak to those skills. Faculty should know what their majors are doing with their degrees beyond the academy. More on this:
The “Is College Worth it” Debate—Not a Debate Worth Having.
icanfinishcollege.wordpress.com | Found via Marcia Cantarella
http://icanfinishcollege.wordpress.com/
Marcia Y. Cantarella, PhD, Author, I CAN Finish College: The Overcome Any Obstacle and Get Your Degree Guide
johnlehman

In regard to the idea that “The original colleges were for the acquiring of knowledge,” this is an a-historical fantasy based on 19th century quarrels over educational policy in Great Britain. Higher education, whether in Roman times or with the foundation of European universities in the middle ages, was vocational — the latter trained theologians, church and secular lawyers and administrators, and doctors. Early American colleges were for the training of ministers and lawyers — later doctors. They required large amounts of “liberal arts” because professionals needed to master the Latin (and later Greek) language and culture in which knowledge was expressed and professional life was carried out at the time. At the same time, knowledge of classical languages and literature became a very strong social class marker.

With the rise of modern languages and science, utilitarians in the 19th century tried to reform higher education to better meet the needs of the modern world, and conservatives defended a focus on classical languages and literature as better meeting the needs of the British Empire as a “modern Rome,” based on 19th century fantasies of a Graeco-Roman inspired government by letters-loving aristocrats rather than ambitious technocrats from the lower orders. Hence the ideal of education for education’s sake — aimed at those who would never actually need to work for a living, but might condescend to lead and administer the country for the good of all.In the Chinese case, one of the complicating factors is that the number of each major at each university each year is still centrally determined, so this sort of input-output analysis goes on informally all the time. I have been involved with Chinese higher education ever since I was a Chinese language major studying in Taiwan in 1970, and both the sociology and politics of education in China is very different from the US.
arrive2__net

It seems to me that it’s a bad plan because it will have the effect of creating what amounts to “blind spot” disciplines in China’s intellectual capital. Certain disciplines may longer have active practitioners in China, if those disciplines are eliminated from China’s colleges.

I would trust market forces to control the numbers of graduates in different majors, rather than central planners. Perhaps the Chinese could vary cost-subsidies by course or major, based on some kind of expected payback model (with payback coming though expected income taxes or some measure of productivity) but I think central planning and prohibiting certain majors is a mistake. It seems to me that, in America or China, if college students have trustworthy and accurate information about the job market they will face on graduation, many will be likely to migrate into comparable but better paying majors on their own, without a need for central planning or coercion.

In the American system, all college majors apparently give an economic benefit, compared with high school diplomas, and recent college grads also have a much lower unemployment rate than recent high school grads ( http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/Unemployment.Final.pdf ). To the extent that there are economic benefits to all majors, you could not prohibit or eliminate a major in America without also eliminating something that was providing an economic benefit to many.

If students were somehow systematically high pressured into giving up selected majors, it could change the supply and demand balance in the labor market, so that the distribution of low pay and unemployment would simply be redistributed on some other basis and would not necessarily create more jobs and better pay. Perhaps there are certain limits on the total number of jobs and the amount of pay available in the “practical majors”, and redistributing majors may not change that.

Forcing the unwilling into certain majors may also leave them discouraged, and lead them to drop out, where they might have continued with a major they would have found stimulating. Students who drop out will have missed the economic benefit that the Georgetown study (above) found for any completed major.

Bart Schuster
OnlineGraduateSchool.tripod.com
Twitter.com/arrive2_net
gloverparker

Dear dear Ben: Your last sentence is a giveaway: ”I don’t see why anyone should have a major problem with that.” Perhaps only every [American] family that kicks in to assist their kid[s] get through college on the assumption that it will lead them to a job that will later enable them to lead a better life than they did..Wasn’t that always the rationale for going to college? If families discuss the stats with their kid at the kitchen table during the senior year at high school this year, maybe we’ll see a more realistic view of what the future holds for the Class of 2015: OK, we’ll help you pay for college but only if you major in x, y or z; if not, ooops –then what? I know: for those families of a certain means, this discussion never takes place. For everyone else, it’s about the trade-offs of working for work’s sake, perhaps not in a field you care much about, or entering the job market in a low-paying/low skill job without much hope of climbing up and into the middle class lifestyle your family wishes for you. The lofty prose in this post belies the reality that most families face when discussing whether or not they can or should send their child to a college or university.
mscardenas

Well, I am an education major, taught for a few years and now back in school for a M.S. in higher education. I definitely did not chose either concentration for the salary involved but rather because I see a great need for teachers/mentors in our world. On the other hand, I understand that not many can give themselves this “luxury” and will chose their majors based on employment. I don’t think following China’s approach is the answer, the U.S. has and will continue to benefit from all their college graduates. Some will earn more than others in dollars but I think all will add value to the society they chose to live in.
dakin

What is needed now is a study of how income and wealth correlate with academic dishonesty. My thought is that people going to the essay writing sites probably have plenty of money and can afford to buy any paper they like. They can easily afford to rent most doctoral candidates for a week. The ones who are poor generally don’t cheat as well. They Google the topic and are very easy to detect. Most studies show that Americans know cheating is wrong, but they do it anyways. What do studies in other countries say about their cheating culture? Another independent variable would be either an inability or unwillingness to document the behavior of students, either on an individual or state level.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Antsy-Kuhnwisse/100002159499682 Antsy Kuhnwisse

Yes, it used to be. I remember that 60% approximation from a book from the early 1970s* — referring to the 1950s, to counter the argument that “it didn’t used to be so bad.”

Maybe there have been some changes in the demographics and (certainly) the methods, but human beings are human beings.

*The book was called *Wad-ja-get?*. It was out of print for years, but now I see a revised edition is available. I’m sure there are many other sources that would show this as well.
pwherry

I believe this kind of research is being done/has been done. I know I heard or read of such a study very recently, though I can’t put my hands on a citation (it came up tangentially, as I recall). The conclusion was that wealthy people cheat more than poor people, and I’ve heard this other times as well. Perhaps other readers with more time or better memories than I can muster at the moment can provide citations?
mbelvadi

Your hypothesis seems to be describing whether rich students are more successful, not more frequent, cheaters. That would probably be much harder to study, although given the previous research it might be possible to get both groups of students to openly admit not just whether they cheated but whether they were caught at it.
Socratease2

“That may be speculative.”

Come on, now, this “thesis” is way more than speculative, it is about three degrees of separation past speculative. Not commenting on the “trust vs. income” argument specifically but I can’t believe a paper can be published with that level of evidence. It is interesting but completely and utterly unproven. Why not surmise that states with large income gaps have poor education systems that leave students unprepared for college and therefore likely to turn to paper mills for their “research papers.” Hell, why not say that 12 trillion years ago Zenu threw aliens into earth volcanos and blew them up, leaving a toxic mental residue over these particular states that creates a penchant for cheating. wish I could publish research that jumps from A to Z with no need for credibility.
nampman

and yet, there are differences in cheating that parallel the differences in inequality in each state. If it were solely a matter of culture, there would not be this relationship. I agree with you that there are individual differences in morality but we should not discount other variables (even surprising ones) that may have an impact.
nampman

I also remember this in the Psychology literature.
nampman

Read the paper before making such a comment. It is well written and does not overstep the evidence.
arlee

Let’s not get off onto another misdirected path to explain bad behavior: I lived in an urban area; I don’t live in an urban area; my father beat my mother; my mother beat my father; they both beat me; I ate too many twinkies, too much red meat, too little citrus, not enough protein, too many carbs; I have a learning disability; I’m the middle child; I’m victim of a bully; I am a bully; my parents don’t care about school; I have helicopter parents.

Sometimes, just sometimes the student is ill-prepared through her/ his own fault, is lazy just because he/she can get away with it, or is learning from the general culture that it’s ok to cheat as long as you don’t get caught. And when those are the issues the cures are discipline, reward for hard work, and enforcing consequences for bad behavior.
nampman

So your support for the just world hypothesis should trump data? That is true laziness.
Socratease2

So, you are saying the argument is not solely based on a correlation between web site searches and reported state income gaps? The paper may be well written but that does not change the level of evidence involved. It is not even based on the rates of actual downloading and submission of fraudulent papers, merely on web searches. That is like saying states that have more web searches on bulk fertilizer purchases are more likely to have increased levels of domestic terrorism. The author of the article is seriously confused when he says:

“Lukas Neville, a doctoral student at Queen’s University in Ontario, reports in the latest issue of Psychological Science that there’s more evidence of academic dishonesty in U.S. states with
bigger gaps between the rich and the poor.”

Excuse me? I still have not seen any evidence. People can speculate all day long, just don’t publish the results as evidence of anything. What did said student measure out as other possible correlations that could confound data? It is much more likely that multiple variables are at play here not just one. But, hey, people with only a hammer will always find that tool to be the one they choose as best.
Socratease2

Sounds good but why are you spending valuable time and money to intervene based on a correlation? You won’t be managing the finances long if you create policy based on what might be true but might also be completely false. In summer months both consumption of ice cream and drownings increase proportionally. Guess by banning ice cream sales in July and August we will slash the numbers of drowning victims, sounds like good policy as well.
vincentm

Does anyone know of an honest poll of faculty, and what percentage of faculty admits to cheating during their studies?
http://www.facebook.com/PurpleTigerProduction Claude Richardson

IMHO… Students cheat when they know they can get away with it, has little to do with money. While income disparities may make different forms or levels of cheating available to some, I believe it has more to do with the integrity of the system in elementary and secondary education institutions, and the impact that coddling of the cheating student has on the individuals academic ability and growth.
Instructors/teachers are pressured to “pass” students, at any price, just to keep their jobs. It also has a lot to do with teachers not having the time or resource to teach other than to the test (due to the weight standardized testing carries). If a student is caught cheating, are they disciplined with an “F”? no. They might go visit the principal, write an essay, maybe have a chat between the parents and teacher. But then again, all the student has to do is cry abuse or discrimination, or some other keyword and the teacher is “investigated”.
In any case, the “F” student passes, and the trend continues into college. (they can cheat by paying someone to take their entrance exams, ACT, & SAT tests too) and into the work force.
flhunterj

Or research that looks at the percent of faculty that decide to reeport such academic dishonesty. Side note: I wonder if the research considered the influence of distance learning programs on the Google data. I know this throws an allen ranch in analysis but you can’t discount this influence. In addition a comment above brought up a good point considering income and the type of cheating which would indicate a huge problem in higher education (You failed this course not because you cheated but because you didn’t have the financial resources to cheat with getting caught).
klwi3329

I tend to believe that the research Fischman cites is very real. I also agree that the media has distorted the real picture. Here are my reasons for cheating:

1. I believe the material is irrelevant to my life; it doesn’t matter.
2. Expectations are unrealistic and I won’t do it, but I still want the grade.
3. I see the moneychangers (via the media) make vast amounts of money for something that contributes nothing to society, and I want mine too.
4. We don’t see the cheaters going to jail. I conclude the odds are in my favor.
5. The glorification of wealth makes me feel small and insignificant. I want to impress the world.
6. Money buys everything – influence, nice things, a gated haven, travel. It doesn’t buy happiness? I’ll take my chances.
11269856

I have not found this to be the case at all. I have never encountered more cheating than at the big state university where I now teach and the income levels here are not at all disparate. I would look more at the disparity between the professors’ and the students’ class and educational backgrounds. In cases where the course seems to demand more than the students are prepared or able to do (and their level of preparedness is sinking dramatically), they tend to resort to downloading papers or assignments. I think the movement of young faculty from the more privileged graduate programs out to areas of the country with poor public schools actually leads to more cheating, sadly.
bernardjsmith

I don’t think the issue is whether there is less or more income disparity in the college or university Is there really much income disparity within a 2 or 4 year college?) but whether there is more or less disparity within the state. Wilkinson and his colleagues’ work looking at stress, health disparities, violence and crime and even longevity seems to suggest strong correlations with income disparities. (see The Spirit Level, for example)