It's pretty well established that non-science degrees are not necessary for a job. In fact, the degrees cost you too much money, require too long of a commitment, and do not teach you the real-life skills they promise.
Yet, I do tons of radio call-in shows where I say that graduate degrees in the humanities are so useless that they actually set you back in your career in many cases. And then 400 callers dial-in and start screaming at me about how great a graduate degree is.
Here are the six most common arguments they make. And why they are wrong.
1. My parents are paying.
Get them to buy you a company instead. Because what are you going to do when you graduate? You're right back at square one, looking for a job and not knowing what to do. But if you spent the next three years running a company, even if it failed, you would be more employable than you are now, and you'd have a good sense of where your skill set fits in the workplace. (This is especially true for people thinking about business school.)
2. It's free.
But you're spending your time. You will show (on your resume) that you went to grad school. Someone will say, "Why did you go to grad school?" Will you explain that it was free? After all, it's free to go home every night after work and read on a single topic as well. So in fact, what you are doing is taking an unpaid internship in a company that guarantees that the skills you built in the internship will be useless. (Here's how to get a great internship.)
3. It's a time to grow and get to know myself better.
If you're looking for a life changing, spiritually moving experience, how about therapy? It's a more honest way of self-examination—no papers and tests. And it's cheaper. Insurance covers therapy because it's a proven way to effectively change your personal disposition. There's a reason insurance doesn't cover grad school.
4. The degree makes me stand out in my field.
Yes, if you want to stand out as someone who couldn't get a job. Given the choice between getting paid to learn the ropes on the job and paying for someone to teach you, you look like an underachiever to pick the latter. If nothing else, you get much better coaching in life if you are good enough and smart enough to get mentorship without paying for it.
There are very very few jobs that require a non-science degree in order to get the job. (And really, forget about law school if that's what you're thinking.) So if you don't need the degree in order to get the job, the only possible reason a smart employer would think you got the degree instead of getting a job was because you were too scared to have to apply or you applied and got nothing. Either way, you're a bad bet going forward.
5. I'm planning on teaching.
Forget it. There are no teaching jobs. In an interview last week, the head of University of Washington's career center even admitted to a prospective student that getting a degree in humanities in order to get a teaching job—even in a community college—is a long-shot at best. And, the University of Washington career coach confirmed that there is enormous unemployment among people who are qualified to teach college courses but cannot get jobs doing it. This is not just a Washington thing. It's a welcome-to-reality thing.
6. A degree makes job hunting easier.
It makes it harder. Forget the fact that you don't need a graduate degree in the humanities to get any job in the business world. The biggest problem is that the degree makes you look unemployable. You look like you didn't know what to do about having to enter the adult world, so you decided to prolong childhood by continuing to earn grades rather than money even though you were not actually helping yourself to earn money.
Also, you also look like you don't really aspire to any of the jobs you are applying for. People assume you get a graduate degree because you want to work in that field. People don't want to hire you in corporate America when it's clear you didn't invest all those years in grad school in order to do something like that.
7. I love being in graduate school! Everything in life is not about careers!
Sure, when you're a kid, everything is not about careers. But when you grow up, everything is about earning enough money for food and shelter. So you need to figure out how to do that in order to make the transition from childhood to adulthood. This is why millionaires have stopped leaving their money to their kids—it undermines their transition to adulthood. But instead of making the transition, you are still in school, pretending things are fine. The problem is that what you do in school is not what you will do in a career. So if you love school, you'll probably hate the career it's preparing you for, since your career is not going to school.
When I met the farmer, one of the first things he told me was that he went to school for genetic biology. But in graduate school his research was in ultrasound technology for pigs. But he missed being with the pigs, which is what he wanted to do for his job. So he left school.
And every time I see the pigs on our farm I think about how he took a risk by dumping a graduate program in order to tend to pigs. I love that.





Reason #7 is valid, and your rejection of it does not impress me in its faux tough-mindedness.
The world is a scary place, but not so scary as to mean anyone who goes to grad school for the experience is a fool. Very few people will starve for making that "mistake," and who gives a damn if their career is marginally worse off.
Indeed, there is more to life than just careers. It's a privilege that we happen to live in a part of the world and a moment in history when we can indulge this sort of thinking.
Posted by Jeff on August 29, 2011 at 12:25 pm | permalink |
I agree!
And Penelope, when will we see a photo?
Posted by Bill on August 29, 2011 at 7:30 pm | permalink |
Bill,
Right there with you. I just graduated from law school and I keep thinking of all of the things I could have done with $100,000 instead. I wish I had started my own company or jumped right into a field where there was potential for me to move up. Instead, I spent the last 10 years earning an MBA and JD for the privilege of working my butt off just to make less money than people I graduated high school with. Bummer.
Thanks for the brutal honesty, Penelope. You speak the truth.
Posted by Lynette on August 30, 2011 at 7:52 am | permalink |
Enjoy working for people like me for the rest of your life, Jeff. When you have a job, that is.
I know I'll enjoy making career decisions about YOU.
Posted by DaveP. on September 4, 2011 at 12:25 pm | permalink |
Dave,
I have a fine career in finance, and the people I work for are of a better sort than make comments like yours.
Regards,
Jeff
Posted by Jeff on January 1, 2012 at 10:42 pm | permalink |
I agree that there is more to life than careers. Personally, I've been fortunate to excel â and quickly â with just a Bachelor's. This is partially because I'm in a field, high tech, with a lot of demand.
However, many of my colleagues earned their Master's degrees in various aspects of high-tech: HCI, UX, computer engineering, and so on, and are doing just as well as I am. None of us are entry level by a long shot. We are all mid-career, and many of us, self included, are managers. Most of my colleagues spent some time in the real world before returning to school, and none encountered any penalties or setbacks for doing so. However, their choice to pursue an additional degree paid off for them. They're eligible for certain jobs that I'm simply not, and my employer (also a small-business owner) prefers to hire people with Master's degrees for many functions in his company. He believes they're simply more specialized and more qualified. If that makes some people angry, they can fight against/speak out against the education bubble, or they can run their own companies they way they want to and only hire people with HS diplomas. It's their choice.
I have also seen many openings at larger companies where a Master's degree makes the difference between earning 5 figures and earning 6 figures â or, in many cases, even getting the job at all.
My sibling chose to pursue a dreaded science Master's degree right out of undergrad. His schooling was fully funded, and he was also awarded an externship that paid for all of his other costs â so anyone, even if they weren't born into riches, can do this, providing they apply for programs with funding. The science he is studying has a heavy computer technology component that is in high demand, and which makes him highly employable. He is being sought after by government agencies for stable, well-paying jobs with outstanding benefits and pension. He won't be someone's lab monkey or pay his dues at just above the minimum wage like he would have if he'd stopped at undergrad. With just a BS, no one wanted to hire him, not even for an internship.
At this point in my life, a Master's degree is not for me. But it very well could be later, and if it is the right choice, I will pursue it. Blanket statements are fun to make, and great for generating traffic and debate, but they help no one.
I'm also on a career forum with several self-righteous small business owners (primarily hoping to "strike it rich" through their "herbal remedy" Web sites and content mills), and they all display they same indignant attitude toward school. They believe anything other than self-employment is a waste of time, but they forget that most people don't have what it takes â or don't want to become â an entrepreneur. (Personally, I think their businesses and track records are nothing to brag about, but if they feel they're special, bully for them.)
It seems to me that people who aren't confident about their life choices, or who feel their way is the only right way to do things believe their own hype and believe in their one-size-fits all advice.
I don't operate that way personally. Each person should go his own way, and choose the path that's best for him.
Posted by Steve on September 16, 2011 at 6:06 pm | permalink |
I agree that there is more to life than careers. Personally, I've been fortunate to excel â and quickly â with just a Bachelor's. This is partially because I'm in a field, high tech, with a lot of demand.
However, many of my colleagues earned their Master's degrees in various aspects of high-tech: HCI, UX, computer engineering, and so on, and are doing just as well as I am. None of us are entry level by a long shot. We are all mid-career, and many of us, self included, are managers. Most of my colleagues spent some time in the real world before returning to school, and none encountered any penalties or setbacks for doing so. However, their choice to pursue an additional degree paid off for them. They're eligible for certain jobs that I'm simply not, and my employer (also a small-business owner) prefers to hire people with Master's degrees for many functions in his company. He believes they're simply more specialized and more qualified. If that makes some people angry, they can fight against/speak out against the education bubble, or they can run their own companies they way they want to and only hire people with HS diplomas. It's their choice.
I have also seen many openings at larger companies where a Master's degree makes the difference between earning 5 figures and earning 6 figures â or, in many cases, even getting the job at all.
My sibling chose to pursue a dreaded science Master's degree right out of undergrad. His schooling was fully funded, and he was also awarded an externship that paid for all of his other costs â so anyone, even if they weren't born into riches, can do this, providing they apply for programs with funding. The science he is studying has a heavy computer technology component that is in high demand, and which makes him highly employable. He is being sought after by government agencies for stable, well-paying jobs with outstanding benefits and pension. He won't be someone's lab monkey or pay his dues at just above the minimum wage like he would have if he'd stopped at undergrad. With just a BS, no one wanted to hire him, not even for an internship.
At this point in my life, a Master's degree is not for me. But it very well could be later, and if it is the right choice, I will pursue it. Blanket statements are fun to make, and great for generating traffic and debate, but they help no one.
I'm also on a career forum with several self-righteous small business owners (primarily hoping to "strike it rich" through their "herbal remedy" Web sites and content mills), and they all display they same indignant attitude toward school. They believe anything other than self-employment is a waste of time, but they forget that most people don't have what it takes â or don't want to become â an entrepreneur. (Personally, I think their businesses and track records are nothing to brag about, but if they feel they're special, bully for them.)
It seems to me that people who aren't confident about their life choices, or who feel their way is the only right way to do things believe their own hype and believe in their one-size-fits all advice.
I don't operate that way personally. Each person should go his own way, and choose the path that's best for him.
Posted by Steve on September 16, 2011 at 6:06 pm | permalink |
I like your comments, not much here that anyone could argue with. I think we all know that the target audience for this post is not those who been successful in their careers, who are happy where they are. It was for people who are unhappy with their choices.
When that happens, people usually look for something to blame the failure on.
Posted by Steve C on September 16, 2011 at 8:24 pm | permalink |
It would be nice to think that this article is only aimed at
people who are dissatisfied with their career paths, but based on Penelope's
previous behavior, I think it is aimed at everyone. She was invited to rail against grad school on a radio program this past spring. Her opponent calmly and rationally laid out his points in favor of grad school, and she got out of control, raising her voice and implying that anyone who went to grad school was an idiot.
This was the most telling part of the interview for me: A mid-career engineer called in, and calmly pointed out that she got her master's fully funded, was debt-free, and was enjoying success on the job. Penelope wasn't having it. She insisted that the woman still made a mistake in going to grad school, and that she wasted her time. In Penelope's mind â even if your grad school experience was 100% funded, you doubled your earning power by virtue of completing the program, and you were genuinely happy with the experience â because you don't conform to her black-and-white view of the world, you're wrong. End of discussion. Perhaps someday she will feel less frustrated when she realizes that many people aren't interested in living life by the The Penelope Trunk Manual(tm), and not everything in life works out a certain way just because she says so.
One might also wonder what went wrong with her grad school program that gave her such a huge axe to grind against it all these years, to the point that she'll even make an ass out of herself attacking successful grad-school alums so she can cling to her tenuous opinion.
Posted by Steve on September 18, 2011 at 12:44 am | permalink |
I agree that there is more to life than careers. Personally, I've been fortunate to excel â and quickly â with just a Bachelor's. This is partially because I'm in a field, high tech, with a lot of demand.
However, many of my colleagues earned their Master's degrees in various aspects of high-tech: HCI, UX, computer engineering, and so on, and are doing just as well as I am. None of us are entry level by a long shot. We are all mid-career, and many of us, self included, are managers. Most of my colleagues spent some time in the real world before returning to school, and none encountered any penalties or setbacks for doing so. However, their choice to pursue an additional degree paid off for them. They're eligible for certain jobs that I'm simply not, and my employer (also a small-business owner) prefers to hire people with Master's degrees for many functions in his company. He believes they're simply more specialized and more qualified. If that makes some people angry, they can fight against/speak out against the education bubble, or they can run their own companies they way they want to and only hire people with HS diplomas. It's their choice.
I have also seen many openings at larger companies where a Master's degree makes the difference between earning 5 figures and earning 6 figures â or, in many cases, even getting the job at all.
My sibling chose to pursue a dreaded science Master's degree right out of undergrad. His schooling was fully funded, and he was also awarded an externship that paid for all of his other costs â so anyone, even if they weren't born into riches, can do this, providing they apply for programs with funding. The science he is studying has a heavy computer technology component that is in high demand, and which makes him highly employable. He is being sought after by government agencies for stable, well-paying jobs with outstanding benefits and pension. He won't be someone's lab monkey or pay his dues at just above the minimum wage like he would have if he'd stopped at undergrad. With just a BS, no one wanted to hire him, not even for an internship.
At this point in my life, a Master's degree is not for me. But it very well could be later, and if it is the right choice, I will pursue it. Blanket statements are fun to make, and great for generating traffic and debate, but they help no one.
I'm also on a career forum with several self-righteous small business owners (primarily hoping to "strike it rich" through their "herbal remedy" Web sites and content mills), and they all display they same indignant attitude toward school. They believe anything other than self-employment is a waste of time, but they forget that most people don't have what it takes â or don't want to become â an entrepreneur. (Personally, I think their businesses and track records are nothing to brag about, but if they feel they're special, bully for them.)
It seems to me that people who aren't confident about their life choices, or who feel their way is the only right way to do things believe their own hype and believe in their one-size-fits all advice.
I don't operate that way personally. Each person should go his own way, and choose the path that's best for him.
Posted by Steve on September 16, 2011 at 6:06 pm | permalink |
It's hard to hear when you've just spent six digits on a useless degree, but you're spot on here. I just graduated from a good law school and I'm lucky enough to have found a job (most of my classmates, and even some from last year's class (!) are still looking), but it's a job that I could easily be doing without the degree. What makes it even worse for me is that I went to law school for exactly the wrong reason…I didn't know what else to do at the time. Now, 3 years and $100k+ later, I have a degree I don't want and can't afford.
Here's an idea for a follow-up article that I think would serve your readers even better: What to do once you've made the mistake of going to grad school.
Posted by Dave Stokley on August 29, 2011 at 12:25 pm | permalink |
I am an elementary school teacher. Where I teach, in Massachusetts, teachers in public schools are required to have master's degrees. I love my job and would not be able to do it without a master's degree. And, while classroom jobs are scarce for new graduates, there are ALWAYS jobs available — substitute jobs, assistant jobs, etc.
My boyfriend graduated from law school. He works for a law clinic in the field of negotiation and conflict resolution. He never wanted to be a lawyer, but needs a law degree to work where he does, and like me he loves his job.
I agree that grad school is prohibitively expensive in this country, but in some fields there is no getting around it.
Posted by Heathen on August 29, 2011 at 12:28 pm | permalink |
Heathen, this is a great example of grad school being for rich people. It strikes me as incredibly difficult for a couple to pay off loans for a master's program and loans from law school on the combined salary of a substitute teacher and a negotiator at a clinic.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on August 29, 2011 at 12:46 pm | permalink |
Well, I can't speak for others but we're able to do it on our salaries without any outside help. I've nearly finished paying off my $40,000 grad school loan out of my $50,000 teaching salary. (I am not a substitute teacher; I was just saying there are jobs available for recent or future grads.) My boyfriend's loans are being paid by the university he works for.
Are you saying only rich people can be teachers??
Posted by Heathen on August 29, 2011 at 1:08 pm | permalink |
I just helped hire 2 people in our department this summer and every resume that listed a masters degree was immediately sent to our no pile. Both were entry level jobs. We only required people to have bachelors because we are a higher education association so employees need to feel comfortable talking with professors and higher. Also, we're events department, so we needed people capable of executing complicated, long term projects, like graduating from college. All a masters degree tells me is that a)you aren't hungry enough for a real paycheck and won't be motivated to do the work I have, b)you're going to be unsatisfied with the work this job has to offer and the lack of potential promotion within our organization in a year or two, or c)that you have a ridiculous amount of student loan debt and your are going to feel financially pinched until you find a better paying job in a year or two. We put a lot of time into hiring people, I do not want to do it again in a year or two.
Posted by Aimee on August 29, 2011 at 3:55 pm | permalink |
@Heathen, It may seem a lot right now but just be aware that if you ever want to start a family it's going to be tough. My mom has been a public school teacher for 30 years and we were just talking about how many teachers she knows who marry teachers and then can't take time off which feels okay when you are in a not-having-kids-place, but going back to work at 12 weeks and putting your new baby into full time daycare is rough. Most couple teachers we know who start a family end up having to have someone change careers.
Posted by Hillary on August 29, 2011 at 5:22 pm | permalink |
Sorry to get bogged down in particulars, but my boyfriend is *not* a teacher. He is a lawyer who works for a clinic at a very reputable law school, lectures there as part of his job, and earns a very decent salary.
In any case, I do generally agree that grad school can be a waste of time and money, especially for people who do it because they can't think of anything better to do. But, I still think there are some professions — social work, teaching, and law, for instance — that require an advanced degree. And maybe even 90% of people who end up at law school shouldn't be there, but there are people (a few, anyway) who have well thought-out reasons for being there and who get what they want out of it.
A good friend's husband left his job a few years ago to get his MFA in poetry, and I thought he was crazy. After he graduated he got a great job teaching at NYU and recently published his first book of poetry. I'm sure it's not the norm but it does happen!
Posted by Heathen on August 29, 2011 at 6:52 pm | permalink |
@Aimee
"All a masters degree tells me is that a)you aren't hungry enough for a real paycheck and won't be motivated to do the work I have, b)you're going to be unsatisfied with the work this job has to offer and the lack of potential promotion within our organization in a year or two, or c)that you have a ridiculous amount of student loan debt and your are going to feel financially pinched until you find a better paying job in a year or two. "
Wow, that is the single most bigoted, arrogant, hateful thing I've read today. You must be a delightful person to work with.
Posted by MJ on August 30, 2011 at 8:04 am | permalink |
I would not be so fast to shoot down the teacher example. At least in the city of Boston, teachers make great money. My kid's first grade teacher makes more than I do. In fact, a dozen of the teachers at this elementary school make between $75-$90K with the principal bringing home $120K. In this example, the masters degree is a necessary ingredient to put together a good career.
Of course that is nothing compared to the money firefighters and police can make, especially if they can add any credentials to their names and be expert witnesses/consultants.
Then there is the medical field…if you want to be a nurse, you need a certain degree which is directly proportional to your earning potential. Entire online colleges exist to fulfill this goal with mostly e-learning courses so an LPN can follow a path to BSN, NP, etc. It is funny when you get older you realize how it's all just a means to an end.
But I think the real point is that if you did not have that plan in mind, then there is a high risk that the master's degree is useless. Graduate degrees don't open any doors but the lack of them can block you in certain specific situations. I think when people start realistically charting a path, the value becomes clear or not pretty quickly. The problem is people who think just getting a degree will be like a magic ticket to success.
Posted by Dave on August 30, 2011 at 8:50 am | permalink |
@MJ – I'm a hiring manager at a major technology company and have hired 25 people over the last 2 years, and I think along the same lines as Aimee does. I don't see it as arrogant or hateful to put the right people in the right jobs that are going to enjoy and be satisfied with the work they are given. Hiring the right people takes a lot of time and effort, and it's not worth spending time hiring people that are going to be unsatisfied, anxious, ineffective, and ready to jump at the first opportunity once they find something else.
Posted by Chris on August 31, 2011 at 11:33 pm | permalink |
@Chris. You are absolutely on the right track in my opinion. One of the worst things that can happen in any organization is when the wrong people end up somehow in the wrong jobs. It's bad for them, and it's bad for the company. If they happen to be in management or decision making positions, it's usually a disaster, in more ways than we think. The primary objective of HR should be focused on avoiding that mistake. I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with what you say.
So perhaps you feel that you and Aimee are delivering the same message. I'm sure she does. But it's like the difference between getting the message from Mr.Rogers as opposed to, say, Leona "taxes are for little people" Helmsley. So kudos to you for trying to do the right thing, but as for Aimee, there's something else going on there. Nobody makes a comment like that without having personal issues with people with graduate degrees, and frankly, I don't believe she is in the right job.
Posted by Steve C on September 1, 2011 at 12:33 am | permalink |
@ MJ @ Aimee
MJ, you left out "ignorant". The only thing Aimee and her organization actually "knows" is they don't know anything about the resumes they have not studied, nor do they know what the future holds in terms of health and life change for anyone they hire.
Will the Aimees of the world will ever understand that no one has hired THEM for purpose of exploiting their employee authority to corrupt their workplace by bending it to what they personally do and do not want to put up with?
What is it about these non-profit cultures? Are they all self-obsessed, preening bigots?
Posted by willem on September 4, 2011 at 3:07 pm | permalink |
At least the folks with graduate degrees escaped having to work with a person like Aimee above. Does anyone else see the nonsensical contradictions in this comment? The quintessential low brow gatekeeper! I wonder if She put happy face stickers on the keeper resumes?
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 8:32 am | permalink |
I don't know what's so awful about that comment. I think it's spot on. Would you take an entry level job with a masters degree and not look for another job as soon as possible? just a simple poll with most of my friends who went to college thinking it was their ticket to get rich or at least a comfortable life style (or sucess) will support that.
Posted by karelys davis on August 30, 2011 at 9:19 am | permalink |
@ Karelys. Aside from the final half of the comment expressing what can only be described as contempt for anyone who has achieved a Graduate level degree, let me parse out my issues with Aimee's post:
"Also, we're events department, so we needed people capable of executing complicated, long term projects, like graduating from college." Hello? Ever hear of a thesis, Aimee? As far as education is concerned, the thesis is the definitive work on long term projects. It happens to be the grim reaper of graduate school(usually involving using/learning statistics). Also:
"We only required people to have bachelors because we are a higher education association so employees need to feel comfortable talking with professors and higher." Huh? So someone with a masters is less likely to feel comfortable talking with "professors and higher", than someone with a bachelors degree? Kindly explain the logic in this statement to me. Here's what I think Aimee must have meant to say: "We need someone who feels comfortable in a subservient role, talking to professors and higher". At least that is the only interpretation that would have any logical and rational basis, and even that interpretation is a stretch. Really says a lot about the high school graduates in that area. The Goldilocks system of employee screening: not too dumb, not too smart. Just mediocre.
And how can someone looking for a job with a company be accused of not being hungry enough for a real paycheck, when they have probably already swallowed a lot of pride applying for an entry level job anyway? And if the only experience they had was college(which Aimee will probably never know because she didn't look past the educational portion of the resume), they should not be condemned for looking for any job they can get, entry-level or otherwise. There was a time when doing just that was something to be applauded.
I'm willing to concede that Aimee's last two points are regular HR fears, but fail to see why they are not also going to apply to graduates with only bachelor's degrees. Either way, they are pretty wild assumptions based on who knows what evidence.
As it sits with me right now, her comment makes her the poster child for what is wrong with the human resources field. I'm curious how someone gets so jaded.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 8:34 pm | permalink |
She didn't mean that "people with a masters degree will be less competent talking to professors" she meant that "the only reason we even require a bachelors degree – as opposed to just taking high school graduates – is so they are familiar with that system". Basically saying it's a low level job, reinforcing her other points. And honestly what she's saying seems pretty reasonable to me.
Posted by cg26 on September 2, 2011 at 9:51 pm | permalink |
cj, I never used the words "less competent", I used the words "less likely". And no, you don't know what she meant, anymore than I do. I just know how I interpreted her comment, and I pointed out what I think are some glaring pre-dispositions and fairly obvious contradictions. I stand by my original comment. I think this person has issues.
It would have been enough to simply say that applicants with masters are clearly over-qualified and would be a poor fit based on her past hiring experiences and the job description. Everybody gets that. Once she started with the "all a masters degree tells me is….", I zoned her out as quickly as she could have shredded a resume.
Perhaps she just felt like this was good time to vent, since after all it was a blog post about Penelope trashing people with masters degrees. Go figure.
Posted by Steve C on September 3, 2011 at 12:32 am | permalink |
I don't know, Steve C., for all your bluster on this I'm starting to wonder if you have issues with people named 'Aimee'. Something you'd like to tell us?
Posted by Douglas Fletcher on September 5, 2011 at 1:31 am | permalink |
Douglass. I don't care if her name is Mother Theresa or Lady GaGa. What I tried to tell everyone is that I have a problem with people in those types of screening positions in Human Resources, when they clearly have pre-dispositions against even considering some people because of something, in this case a masters degree, on their resume.
I know hiring is challenging, but every person who walks through that door is different. And you will never know how different if you never even look at them.
Suppose one of them took Penelope's advice to leave any mention of a Masters degree off his or her resume. What then? What does THAT tell Aimee?
Aside from that, what Aimee's comments told me is that she has biases that are clearly interfering with her ability to do a professional job of putting the right people in the right jobs. And I found her comments to be contradictory, and, frankly, offensive as well.
So yes, I have predispositions too, especially regarding Human Resources people because I believe they all have many predispositions, most of which never see the light of day. So in that respect, I suppose Aimee deserves some credit for being honest about hers. I still think they cast doubt on whether she should be the gatekeeper for her company however.
BTW, there are plenty of behavioral assessments available to businesses that are not illegal in most states, because they are not discriminatory. They do cost money up front however, which needs to be weighed against the cost of hiring the wrong people, and then having to go through the "seat-of-the-pants" method over and over again. The last time I looked, the average of cost of replacing a bad hire, retraining a new employee etc. was around $30k. Noting to sniff at.
Posted by Steve C on September 5, 2011 at 6:31 pm | permalink |
>>> I love my job and would not be able to do it without a master's degree.
You couldn't teach third graders about frogs without seven years of formal secondary education? Jesus.
We are a society of people hung up on their credentials instead of their accomplishments.
Ya know *why* they require a Masters Degree to teach basic arithmetic? Because it's a job that could be done by any 22 year old with a high school diploma and a little bit of patience, and this is how the union keeps the taxpayers forking over $90,000 a year to people like you.
It's called creating a regulatory barrier to entry so you can limit the competition for your job. Without it, the taxpayers would pay $32,000 a year to some young girl who could do the job every bit as good as you for one third the cost.
But that's the nature of government: make sure that everything costs as much as humanly possible; taxpayers exist to make sure you retire comfortably at 50 years old while they toil well into their seventies.
Posted by John on September 4, 2011 at 2:23 pm | permalink |
>>> "We are a society of people hung up on their credentials instead of their accomplishments."
Yep. At MIT, the student-run Educational Services Program arranges for a number of events (some taking place over a summer, others taking place over a weekend) where high schoolers and middle schoolers can learn from MIT students. The MIT students who teach are young, and usually do not have their degrees yet, but they are passionate about their fields and hobbies.
The subjects vary, but classes have included single and multivariable calculus, trigonometry, microeconomics, physics, poetry, fiction writing, evolutionary biology, microbiology, robotics, computer programming, and history. (As well as more specialized classes such as the history of space travel, science fiction and fantasy literature, and how to make chocolate truffles.) The program is large and growing, and based on students' and parents' feedback, extremely successful.
You do NOT need a degree to be a good teacher. You simply have to be knowledgeable and able to get the ideas across. The requirements that teachers have a Masters degree are only there to justify higher salaries and reduce the number of applicants, and do not have anything to do with ability to teach in the real world.
Posted by Londel on September 4, 2011 at 3:30 pm | permalink |
I'm not impressed that the school district where you work is so into credentialism that they create an artificially high barrier (a Master's degree to teach primary grades). Maybe it's a great place to work and all, and they can be so finicky, but do they actually pay enough to make that extra degree worthwhile, and do they really use whatever extra education it embodies in teaching 9 year olds? Color me VERY skeptical…. I believe what you write, I just believe it's an outlier that will go away as economic reality sets in over the next few years.
Posted by Marty on September 5, 2011 at 12:10 am | permalink |
Generally, I agree with this advice and give it occasionally. I have a Ph.D. in history, and work in the business world (pension fund investment strategy).
One thing I will say to offer some balance is that once you overcome many of these obstacles and get a professional job and start to build meaningful post-academic career then the Ph.D. and grad school-honed skills and experiences can be helpful. They can allow you to accelerate up the ladder, and be noticed for taking interesting, original perspectives on things.
So, all is not lost if you've gone to grad school. But if you haven't, Penelope's advice is spot on.
Posted by Wendy on August 29, 2011 at 12:36 pm | permalink |
Agreed, but then again in support of PT's position is the fact that grad school is damaging to people's ability to write clearly. Since graduating, I've had to unlearn the bad writing habits I learned getting a history Ph.D.
Posted by Erica Peters on August 29, 2011 at 2:10 pm | permalink |
I have to say, that really surprises me. I can understand someone with a graduate degree in math or engineering having some literary shortcomings, that is to be expected given the immersion in math/physics required. But in history, or english? Just having to read all that material should have done something to increase your literary skills and abilities. It's a puzzler to me.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 3:26 pm | permalink |
Steve C is surprised? I'm not.
Most academic papers are written passive voice.
Effective business communications are written active voice.
This is the #1 bad writing habit I've seen from people freshly out of grad school.
Posted by JohnM on September 4, 2011 at 12:49 pm | permalink |
Interesting point by JohnM. My thought was that you really have to feel comfortable with writing if you are going to attend graduate school, unless it is in a science/engineering field. At least you have something to work with if an employee has a graduate degree. It probably has a lot more to do with where someone went to graduate school, and who their advisors were, than whether they attended or not. If someone is determined and well read, they should be able to develop the technical writing skills of someone with a graduate degree. Doing it so that anyone else actually wants to read it, as Penelope does, well, that's another story altogether.
Posted by Steve C on September 4, 2011 at 2:19 pm | permalink |
Undergrad humanities degrees are an equally obscene waste of time and money. Grad school merely compounds the original mistake.
Posted by Brad on August 29, 2011 at 12:50 pm | permalink |
I always say that people who are in grad school are just afraid of growing up. I stand by that. Damn near every graduate student I've ever met has this snooty, "holier than thou" attitude about working. But really I can see right through it – fear of growing up and living in the "real" world.
Posted by Lindsay | The Daily Awe on August 29, 2011 at 12:51 pm | permalink |
Love the title.
I just dropped off my oldest at university as a freshman, and have a growing conviction that arguments like this one are right on. There is a bubble in higher education, and it is about to burst.
Posted by Joe Fusco on August 29, 2011 at 12:56 pm | permalink |
Thanks for this. I'm having a hard time trying to justify grad school (I am in one of the few fields where science degrees are mandatory), but your list helps cement my conviction that grad school is a waste of money.
Posted by Yuse Lajiminmuhip on August 29, 2011 at 12:58 pm | permalink |
I think I got my Masters sensibly. Of course, my motivation for doing it at all was exactly what you're talking about– not being ready to go out into the real world. But I was in England and hadn't yet decided if I loved my boyfriend at the time enough to stay (the answer was no) and I was buying myself some time. And in England undergrad degrees are only 3 years because there is none of this general education crap that American colleges force kids to do so they can charge them for an extra year. So I got my BA and my MA in a total of 4 years, for a lot cheaper than it would have cost here (all UK universities charge the same tuition regardless of the quality– perceived or real). Then I messed about for six months before my dad gave me a job, a really good job where I'm getting a lot of experience. So if you want to go to grad school, make sure there's a family business to fall back on.
Oh, and by the way, if anyone's considering going to England to get a degree: it's not cheap anymore. I didn't pay the international fees because I'm a UK citizen, and even those fees have gone up threefold since I was in school (a mere three years ago).
Posted by Harriet May on August 29, 2011 at 1:04 pm | permalink |
Why does your blog bio say you spent eight years studying for your two degrees?
Posted by JvS on August 30, 2011 at 12:49 am | permalink |
I think it's great that you finally spell out some of the previously hidden preconditions for your all-sweeping 'gradschool is useless'-statement. I completely buy into your argument that it makes you less employable and you lost valuable years that you could have spent doing other things, if your goal is to become employable or rich.
I will also admit that you're pretty much a bozo if you get a PhD in the natural sciences as well, but that does at least open the door for some industry jobs that are not available without it. By opening the door I don't mean that you are guaranteed to get these kinds of jobs: I mean that you won't get filtered out before the interview because you lack the degree.
Posted by Sam on August 29, 2011 at 1:05 pm | permalink |
I went to grad school straight out of undergrad to attend a top master in public policy program. I obtained a full tuition scholarship and was lucky enough to land a great consulting job afterward. However, I really think the stars just aligned for me because several of my classmates did not find jobs immediately and are still not paid as well. For me, I felt I needed to go to become exposed to new possible careers, network, and obtain an overall confidence boost. All of that was worth two years of time to me, but I doubt I would have ever paid the $100+ it would have cost to attend unassisted.
Posted by Shann on August 29, 2011 at 1:06 pm | permalink |
I read this as saying that if the choice is between studying and doing, the latter will get you further. And teach you more.
As always, there are exceptions, where even starting your own business won't help you get around the tradition of "everyone who has had this kind of position for the past 100 years had been to grad school". But how fun would life be without exceptions?
Posted by Agnese on August 29, 2011 at 1:09 pm | permalink |
Uh! Been saying that for years. Since I got my PhD in Sociology. Grad school gives you lots, but as far as career goes, forget it. Pointless at best. But there is a distinction to be made. People will always reach for the sky, that's part of human nature. Look at what we did just for the pleasure of doing it. We went to the moon and took a 20 minute walk on it! Was that a money maker? No. Did that change how we see ourselves? Yes. So, if going to grad school is your way to go to the moon and change yourself, do it. You'll be happy. If, on the other hand, you go to grad school for your career, forget it.
You know what they say in the gym? If you want to have bigger biceps, you gotta work those biceps. Same here, if you want to have a big career, you better start working on your career. And grad school is not a career.
Posted by Alex Dogliotti on August 29, 2011 at 1:09 pm | permalink |
Great points, Alex. Grad school can be an end in itself. I wanted to do amazing, science in infectious disease, and I did some amazing science in infectious disease. My work contributed to our understanding of two big pathogens. A science PhD *is* about doing–it's not about studying. Most people don't know this.
The kind of science I was doing was basic, too. No way was it going to be done by a company. The research I'm involved in now actually threatens in a small way some vaccine manufacturers, but the work needs to get done.
Sometimes, the "life" part is more important than the "career" part.
Posted by postdoc on January 3, 2012 at 9:36 pm | permalink |
This post is hilarious! The best ones are # 3 (navel gaze w/hours of 1:1 therapy vs school); and # 7 (don't go to grad school if you want to work w/pigs-rofl!)
Love the title, too. Love the "me crushing them". Awesome; just awesome.
Posted by Lourdes on August 29, 2011 at 1:17 pm | permalink |
I like and agree with this post – and I'm even a current graduate student. In the liberal arts, no less!
I'm one of those "I just love school" types, but I recognize how leaving the workforce and job market for 2-4 years can negatively impact my career, especially at this point (I'm 26). So I'm doing both. I have a job in the field I love and pursue my Master's in my "spare time." I think of it as a pricey hobby and I'm okay with that.
Posted by Natalie on August 29, 2011 at 1:22 pm | permalink |
I apologize that I didn't have a chance to read through all the comments after your post, however I was wondering what your thoughts are about getting a masters degree as part of a life goal or your bucket list (i.e. think of bungee jumping, or travelling, etc…)? While I'm not interested in grad school (even though it's been pushed down my throat) I'm just wondering (on behalf of my husband). Thanks so much!
Posted by Amanda on August 29, 2011 at 1:30 pm | permalink |
Loved this–I have a professor pushing me to get a masters and this is just the reminder I needed that it would be an enormous waste of money. I'd had it in my head that I needed a masters to change careers, but actually, I probably don't.
Posted by ama on August 29, 2011 at 1:34 pm | permalink |
What about a semi-science, semi-humanities graduate degree, something in economics, policy, or business?
Posted by Yuan on August 29, 2011 at 1:36 pm | permalink |
I've always said that if I ever won the lotto I would go to school forever. I would get degrees in everything. When I say that people ask me why I don't just go to grad school now. There is an unspoken rule in our country that you are never supposed to say that more education is bad.
But it is. And you're saying it. You and James Altucher. And that's about it.
Posted by Brooke Farmer on August 29, 2011 at 1:42 pm | permalink |
So the scary thing about all this is, in a world where we are in danger of being controlled by zealots who believe all life must revolve around a literal reading of the constitution and/or the Bible(or Koran in other countries), and those same zealots draw their power from ignorant masses, here we are having a discussion about decreasing higher education?
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 12:13 am | permalink |
Right, because "education" can only come from an accredited institution of higher learning. Knowledge gained outside the academy is by definition either not education or of a decidedly lower form than the "higher" version produced exclusively in our colleges and universities.
Posted by Kevin on August 30, 2011 at 5:43 pm | permalink |
@Kevin. I hear what you are saying, but to be honest, I'm not sure if I agree with it or not. Experience teaches things you just don't learn in school, and it takes a long time to acquire it, no getting around it. But it is the rare individual who is self-taught to the level that an accredited institution can provide, especially a graduate level institution. Both involve the sharing and passing along of knowledge and universal truths, but experience is a more individual journey. Education has to be done with teachers. And it has to be vetted to be accredited. Both need to be valued and nurtured by society. Well, at least a functional society.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 9:25 pm | permalink |
To Steve C. I, too, prefer a more relaxed, flexible interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. My personal feeling about the First Amendment is that you, Steve C., should not be free to post on this or any blog. A literal, originalist reading (i.e. we are all equally free to express ourselves) is stodgy and oppressive.
Posted by Steven Fogarty on September 4, 2011 at 2:17 pm | permalink |
Steven. I guess I've been hoisted by my own petard. I could probably clarify the point I was trying to make, but I think you probably already know what it is.
Posted by Steve C on September 6, 2011 at 4:32 am | permalink |
yup. what brooke farmer said.
Posted by Mel on September 1, 2011 at 11:00 am | permalink |
No, Brooke. Trunk is saying that incremental formal graduate education is a low- to negative-return investment in most non-science (and I will add non-engineering and non top-10 business school) fields.
And she's absolutely correct, even when factoring in the non-pecuniary value of associated with the utility that certain people reap from staying in school and being a student.
Value? Non.
Posted by Andrew on September 1, 2011 at 7:15 pm | permalink |
Could you define "incremental formal graduate education" for me? I have never heard that description before.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 11:15 am | permalink |
Brooke. I think part of the reason for the "unspoken" rule about more education is a more explicit "spoken" rule: "Stupid is as stupid does".
There is a reason why we have public education in the first place. Our forefathers(and mothers) were no-nonsense, practical people. They clearly saw the benefit of a good education. Still, that doesn't completely explain the infatuation with post-graduate education. I think somewhere along the way we have somehow attached some extra social status to having a post grad degree. That's not completely the fault of the individuals who perceive it that way. It is a real phenomenon. On the other hand, some of that comes from how much we are actually teaching/learning up to the 12th grade in HS. I saw a post or article a while back that exhibited a final exam for an 8th or 9th grad class back in the early 1800's. It was eye-opening. I'm guessing most of us posting comments here would not pass it. I know I would fail it if I had to take it right now.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 12:15 pm | permalink |
Post-secondary.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 4:57 pm | permalink |
The bubble of grad studies is just a sign of the times. People can't get good jobs when they graduate, so they stay in school. There's no big master plan at work here. It's just people trying to accommodate to the new reality and not knowing all the options they have.
Of course, it would help the economy if they'd just take the crap jobs that are available. But people hate failure, and that's what it feels like to take a job that a high school kid could do.
It's human nature, Penelope. They're not wrong, they're just human.
Posted by Nancy on August 29, 2011 at 1:45 pm | permalink |
Nice point. When I first went back to college, it was during a another recession. The program I was in, engineering technology, was almost all "non-traditional" students who had returned to college to finish degrees or get new ones because the economy was in the tank and they had been laid off and couldn't get new jobs.
Another thing is, it's often easier to stay in school once you start, if you work it right, than it is to leave and then try to get back into it later on down the road.
Timing has a lot to do with how successful any venture is in life as well.
No one would go to school, or go back to school, if life was just peachy and all wants were being satisfied.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 12:27 am | permalink |
So it's better to spend 2-3 years and $100,000+ (plus interest if you borrowed it) and *then* take the job a high school kid could do? Not sure how this helps with a sense of failure.
I think P writes posts like this specifically *because* she gets that young adult humans are given to not knowing the options they have.
Unfortunately, it is also human nature to resist clear-spoken logic and good advice.
Posted by Patricia on September 1, 2011 at 7:03 pm | permalink |
Patricia. I don't see where you are getting that from Nancy's comment. Where does she say it is better to go to graduate school, or that it "helps" with failure? The way I read her post, she is simply saying that it is what it is: a typically human reaction to a situation that some perceive as being beyond their control, i.e., a terrible economy or job market.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 11:31 am | permalink |
I actually would like to go to graduate school, but not at all for my career. I miss the excitement and inspiration I got from learning about different theories in physics and mathematics. However, right now I have enough to do working full time with school-aged children. Grad school is my semi-retirement plan. I wonder if I could take the courses on an audit basis and pay less? After all, I don't care about the degree.
Posted by rb on August 29, 2011 at 2:35 pm | permalink |
So, for those of us who agree with your points but realized them too late, how do you go about *fixing* your career after getting a master's in the humanities?
Posted by Beth on August 29, 2011 at 2:37 pm | permalink |
I`m thinking that you just leave it off your resume. I guess if you get asked about why there is a hole there, there are probably a variety of things you can say like I travelled (expand any vacation you would have taken at the time lol), the good old re-framing bit.
Posted by Helen on August 29, 2011 at 4:35 pm | permalink |
I think that's a bad idea. When I hear that, I always think of the reaction some single mom struggling to get a GED would have if they heard that suggestion. They would kill to have that degree. If you are going to "re-frame", make something up about why you are glad that you got a masters degree. If you are lying, the lie is probably going to be sniffed out. Better to work on putting a positive spin on your hard-earned degree than to put all your eggs in a negative basket. One way or another, you've got to tell the story. Just be thankful you don't have to tell a story about a felony conviction, or a big hole created while you were locked up.
How about not wasting your time applying for jobs where a masters degree is clearly an over-qualification?
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 12:43 am | permalink |
Helen's advice is good. I completely agree. And I've seen it work many, many times.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on August 30, 2011 at 1:11 am | permalink |
Hating on graduate school is easy and you are clearly right.
However, I think there's a better topic for your talents: Suppose you have gone to graduate school in the humanities, discovered (in your late twenties) you have a useless degree, and need to get your career back on track. What advice would you offer?
Posted by Psyche on August 29, 2011 at 2:42 pm | permalink |
Well, I did that. I played professional beach volleyball, and then I was stuck. I didn't know what to do next. So I went to graduate school for English. And, look, here I am. Most of the advice I give on this blog is what I ended up doing once I realized that an English degree would not get me anywhere.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on August 29, 2011 at 6:16 pm | permalink |
I'm sorry…did you just say that your experience in graduate school for English had nothing to do with your eventually becoming a professional…writer? I realize that an English degree does not equal writing success, but these are related fields. Seems like graduate school did actually help you find your path, eventually.
Posted by B.J. on August 30, 2011 at 7:43 am | permalink |
BJ:
I have two engineering degrees and an top-5 MBA and have not taken an English class since high school (I placed out of freshman rhetoric.) I write better than any English major (post-grad or otherwise) I've met in the 20 years since I got my engr MS. English degrees are risible.
You're confusing cause and effect. PT went to English grad school because she was a compelling writer. I'll bet that grad school didn't make her a better writer compared with the improvement she would have seen had she simply spent the two years writing and seeking critiques for free.
Everything we need to become effective writers we learn easily in high school (if we pay attention and write a great deal) and by reading a handful of style guides.
The dearth of logical and deductive thinking in these comments is (1) appalling; (2) vindication of her thesis.
Posted by Andrew on September 1, 2011 at 7:39 pm | permalink |
@Andrew. You didn't really just use the word risible instead of just saying laughable, did you? Well, aren't you all that!
If that comment wasn't so pitifully transparent, it would be risible.
Penelope clearly is implying that going to Grad school in English had nothing to do with where she is now. She may be getting all of her career advising knowledge from whatever she did after realizing that an English degree was not going to "get her anywhere", but to suggest that her experience in grad school had nothing to do with what she does now is ludicrous.
I think the ones confusing cause and effect here are you and Penelope, not BJ.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 3:37 pm | permalink |
Understand and agree with most of this – but here's why it's still not a real-world argument. I'm a mom of two recent undergraduates with [useless] humanities degrees and neither of them are planning on doing anything that requires them to go to graduate school, yet for some reason both of them think they won't get a [real] job unless they do. Wait – I know the reason: leaders at many companies think you must have a graduate degree in, say, marketing to do any kind of marketing job. Why? Possibly because THEY had to do it? I have been with a Fortune 50 company for 15 years, slogging away with my measly undergraduate economics degree after gaining experience running my family business. Working to move up the ladder, I'm seeing new, young kids with $100K marketing MBAs being promoted to jobs for which they have neither the experience or the passion that those of us with non-traditional backgrounds have. Pardon me for being the jaded old lady here, but until someone changes the focus of hiring managers to revere and accept experience as an equal or better source of education, we will not be able to move beyond graduate degrees being a de facto barrier for lazy corporations to weed through the long list of people looking for jobs. Better, as Penelope said, to be prepared to fail in starting your own company…and once you have the experience, stay with the smaller companies who may value experience over fancy degrees.
Posted by Sylvia on August 29, 2011 at 2:57 pm | permalink |
I tend to agree with you. I think it is a great and somewhat unexplainable tragedy that experience is so poorly valued in today's corporate world. My own sense is that hiring managers are lazy, as you pointed out, and I also believe they feel less guilty throwing younger workers overboard when their jobs are outsourced or off-shored.
You also have to consider who you are talking about here: human resources people, the absolute bottom of the productivity food-chain in any organization, almost without fail. Get any executive drunk and ask them who contributes the least to the bottom line of their organization, and they will tell you it's the human resource people.
It doesn't have to be that way, but for a perfect example of what I am describing here, I would point to the post by Aimee above.
Posted by Steve C on August 29, 2011 at 5:05 pm | permalink |
I've worked in high-tech management for 12 years, and what I see is that the percentage of senior managers and executives with advanced degrees is a small minority. Our CEO has a BA in History. All senior leaders reporting to him have bachelors degrees only. The "marketing MBA" types you reference don't last very long at our company, and real on-the-job work experience is much more valued than a marketing MBA. They do exist – sometimes a new VP will go through a fad of hiring MBAs – but then they will move on once the people that do the real work figure out that the MBAs are more interested in impressing everyone by regurgitating their textbooks than doing real work that moves the company forward. Maybe some companies have a bigger concentration of MBAs, but it is not popular at our Fortune 50 company.
Posted by Chris on August 31, 2011 at 11:49 pm | permalink |
I always think about your opinion on graduate school when I discover that many of my peers are getting their MAs and longing to get their Ph.D's. People keep talking about a bubble – I don't know what this means exactly – but my perception is that for many people, higher education is deemed as the HOLY GRAIL of, well, life. People who have higher degrees are perceived in a specific way, and there are jobs that might prefer that you have a MA in something versus simply a BA.
(I remember reading somewhere that as BAs become more plentiful, jobs are demanding higher degrees to "weed out applicants". But as you mentioned in an earlier comment, the price of education gets higher every year, which isn't something people are realistic about as they shove students back onto college campuses).
I'm on the fence with your perspective and my own. Your perspective has allowed me to view job security and education in a different way. A degree doesn't really guarantee you anything, experience does (comparatively). And I go back and forth because like many people who pursue higher education, I enjoy institutionalized learning and it's definitely something I want to go back to at some point. I'm just not sure what I would do, and I'd only go back if it was completely paid for.
But I also feel that we can expand the conversation on how we utilize degrees instead of just looking at degrees as linear. Our view of education needs to be more expansive and not just focus on grades and what texts we've read. The graduate school experience needs to be re-shaped so that when you go, you get work experience. One college I looked at actually sends you on an internship for like a whole year or semester. Then you come back with industry experience. More colleges need to do that. Right now, academia – in general – is very cerebral where we talk about theory and abstract concepts. It needs to start being grounded and less "bubble-esque". If that makes sense.
Posted by Tatiana on August 29, 2011 at 3:00 pm | permalink |
Thanks for saying what I've long been thinking, Penelope! I went to business school right after undergrad (actually, it was kind of a dual-degree program), and I think it's hurt me more than it's helped me.
Like you said, people assume that when you go to grad school, it's because you're going after what you want to do, but for me that wasn't and still isn't the case. So getting an advanced degree has pigeon-holed me into my field of concentration. But what's done is done, and what's important is that I learned from the experience. Thanks, Penelope, for giving me permission to call grad school a mistake.
Posted by Will L. on August 29, 2011 at 3:01 pm | permalink |
I was a bystander to a conversation between a dutch law student and NYU law student over the weekend. Dutch student pays $1,500 / year for law school. NYU student said $69,000. The NYU student looked like she was going to cry when she heard it.
Posted by Erik on August 29, 2011 at 3:03 pm | permalink |
My friend linked this to me. So I'm going to jump up and down and point at myself as the exception. PhD in Economics/Finance.
If you're going to the heavy lifting in this field, you need the schooling. At a minimum a Masters in graduate economics and math is necessary (unless you're a Russian chess champion and boy-genius). All of the best courses are taught through the PhD sequences so you'll be hanging out with PhD students anyway. The difference? Masters students pay tuition. While finance PhD programs are very generous: free tuition plus 20-35k a year.
Posted by B on August 29, 2011 at 3:28 pm | permalink |
B – you are so not the target audience of this blog. I mean, PhD in Economics? Don't even bother; really.
Posted by Cat on August 29, 2011 at 7:35 pm | permalink |
Cat,
I'm not sure why you think that. Everything in an MBA student's corporate finance or asset pricing textbook starts with us.
Posted by B on August 29, 2011 at 11:03 pm | permalink |
B –
Actually, my comment was a compliment.
The target audience of this blog are low poets; period.
The blog is fun to read, but it's packed with fallacies.
So, just take the "advice" as pure entertainment.
Posted by Cat on August 30, 2011 at 6:43 am | permalink |
Oops – meant "low achievers", as in "laid-back". But I mean it in the best way.
Some commenters are more insightful, though. Too bad they don't have their own blogs.
Posted by Cat on August 30, 2011 at 6:46 am | permalink |
Aw. I was having fun hashing over the "low Poets" label.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 3:29 pm | permalink |
Thank you for the compliment. But I don't think a PhD in economics is as hard as you make it out to be. It's fairly laid back. I have some deadlines, but I decide when I want to work. There are a lot of discussions and presentations. (I was just assigned a 30 minute corporate finance presentation due in two weeks.) I imagine it's a lot like co-managing a small business.
And the collaboration with students and faculty is very rewarding. Being surrounded by like-minded people with the same passion is infectious.
I work 50+ hours a week including Saturdays and Sundays. I think anyone that wants to do something exceptional should expect to do the same if not more. Nothing great happens in 40 hours a week.
Posted by B on August 31, 2011 at 9:22 am | permalink |
You don't have a problem with graduate school. You have a problem with the humanities.
I get paid enough money in my graduate program in the life sciences to get by ok, and (get ready to overdose on sanctimoniousness) I am doing something I love and making the world a better place.
No regrets, yo.
Posted by N on August 29, 2011 at 3:40 pm | permalink |
Well, there's grad school, and there's grad school in STEM.
(1) and (2) – In my day they paid YOU to go to school (harder to find today, but still quite possible), expected maximum performance for their money, and didn't hesitate to cut you loose if you couldn't hack it. My incoming cohort had 33 students; five of us completed PhDs. Brutal, but my graduate education has actual value because of it. The only student loans I ever had to pay were those that came with my spouse. Who had a music major / English minor, couldn't find a job, retrained as a math teacher, and has been working ever since.
(3) Doesn't apply to STEM folks, as we're either all grown up by fourteen or never grow up at all.
(4), (5), and (6) – If you want to be in a STEM field, and especially if you want to teach in that field, you get a doctorate. Period. So there's no "standing out" or "making job hunting easier" or "planning on teaching" distinctions involved. And don't worry about the lack of teaching jobs – literature PhDs may be a dime a dozen but good STEM teachers are hard to find. If you are one, you'll never want for work.
Like some earlier commenters I disagree that (7) is a disadvantage. I enjoyed grad school a lot. True wealth is being able to do what you enjoy and at that time in my life it was the right place to be and the right thing to do.
I was lucky and found a department that was a cut above the university housing it. I didn't fall into the post-doc trap and went straight into full-time teaching, with very little research requirement. So five years of grad school has given me twenty-five years (so far) of challenging and enjoyable work that pays fairly well, that frankly isn't that difficult, and that's mostly been on nine-month contracts that give me summers to work or play as I please. If you can do it and if you would enjoy it, I highly recommend picking up a graduate degree in a STEM field.
Posted by Southern Man on August 29, 2011 at 3:53 pm | permalink |
"And don't worry about the lack of teaching jobs â literature PhDs may be a dime a dozen but good STEM teachers are hard to find. If you are one, you'll never want for work."
Have you been involved in the hiring process for new teachers lately? I suspect things have changed over the last 25 years. The common wisdom in my graduate department (biology-related) was that you have to apply to 60 jobs in order to land a teaching gig at a college. And now people are saying it's tough to find 60 openings to apply to inside a year. And over the last 2-3 decades, the number of people admitted to PhD programs in the sciences has increased dramatically, as those teaching jobs disappear.
(Disclosure: I left my PhD program with a masters degree and now work in the biotech industry)
Posted by leftspeaker on August 29, 2011 at 7:56 pm | permalink |
Reality check:
For argument's sake, let's say each university math professor has three math graduate students working under him (it's always a him). All three eventually get PhDs. Their teacher does not retire. This happens, let's say, 300 times in the US every year. So of course there are not enough tenured teaching positions to go around.
The STEM people, or whatever you call them, end up having little control over where they live (the locations no one wants, like Idaho) and they have short-term gigs, because they are not tenured.
So then the people with PhDs go teach high school science, or go into industry (seen largely as an act of failure among university types), and they didn't need a PhD for either of those. The PhD becomes a formal announcement that they were not one of the short list of chosen people for tenure-track university positions.
The whole thing looks like a ponzi scheme to me — so that tenured professors can get smart people to run their labs.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on August 30, 2011 at 1:31 am | permalink |
STEM people overwhelmingly do not go for teaching or University professorships. Someone needs to run silicon valley, develop new devices to run your gadgets, develop the newest GPS system, make traffic run smoothly, develop the math to run Wall Street, find new rubber components for your tires, develop the newest medication, and find ways to make most of the things we use without thinking in our daily lives. And yes, you actually need the education from a graduate degree to work in these jobs, which about 95% (or even 99%) of students in STEM fields will populate.
Posted by redrock on August 30, 2011 at 3:01 am | permalink |
Education is about learning about "how to think" versus inputting raw knowledge with no insight. Schools need to be tied socially and politically to major employers and trends.
Posted by Murad Abel on August 29, 2011 at 4:05 pm | permalink |
I'm going to make a significant contribution to your education. Read and study the following books:
Love and Respect by Eggerich
Reconcilable Differences by Talley
The Secrets Men Keep by Arterburn
If the marriage counselors WE went to had done so, we'd still be married, and most happily so. Sadly, I had to learn these truths after the divorce; the counseling we actually got was…well, let's say it was pretty useless.
And if you can take it, read the blog (including archives) Chateau Heartiste, which produces more naked truth about how relationships actually work than any book ever written.
Be aware that "truth" like this is often unwelcome in the classroom.
Posted by Southern Man on August 29, 2011 at 7:35 pm | permalink |
I have a few responses to this installment – I have enjoyed Penelope's blog for some time, but I think she is overgeneralizing here:
I am 42, and starting graduate school tomorrow – to become a licensed Marriage/Family therapist. I could not do this job without recieving the MA degree and getting licensed, at least not without any legitimacy. I have been planning this career for about 20 years…putting it off, and trying everything else under the sun, career-wise – mostly focused on how I could earn a living while making the world a better place. I am not afraid to grow up – I served 4 years in the military after high school, where I promptly grew up. I have been inspired by other posts by Penelope encouraging that we do what we are most passionate about, so the statement that life is just about earning and surviving seems contradictory – I don't buy it. I may be misinterpreting, since you also love the farmer because he chose to raise pigs.
I just ran my own business for 6 years and was obliterated by this economy. My career/work life has beena journey of evolving to understand my gifts, and how to best apply them…on this knowledge I have based my currnet decision. Becoming a licensed therapist is a long and hard path, and I am not discouraged by that – I guarantee you that noone chooses this path based on earning potential or career prestige.
So, please be careful about over-generalizing, because there are lots of reasons people make decisions like going to grad school, or not…After proving myself succesful in various arenas, I have found myself wary of winging it any longer, undercredentialed for a "profession" and overqualified for menial jobs…unemployed with three college degrees, and unable to qualify for social safety nets like food stamps or unemployment insurance. A truly nasty conundrum.
Posted by Michael Feliciano on August 29, 2011 at 4:12 pm | permalink |
Speaking of education – ry for the typos – I was typing fast with a bandage on my finger LOL.
Posted by Michael Feliciano on August 29, 2011 at 4:37 pm | permalink |
I'm going to make a significant contribution to your education. Read and study the following books:
Love and Respect by Eggerich
Reconcilable Differences by Talley
The Secrets Men Keep by Arterburn
If the marriage counselors WE went to had done so, we'd still be married, and most happily so. Sadly, I had to learn these truths after the divorce; the counseling we actually got wasâ¦well, let's say it was pretty useless.
And if you can take it, read the blog (including archives) Chateau Heartiste, which produces more naked truth about how relationships actually work than any book ever written.
Be aware that "truth" like this is often unwelcome in the classroom. But feel free to use it to make your professors crazy. And sorry about the double post, the first one replied to the wrong comment.
Posted by Southern Man on August 29, 2011 at 7:38 pm | permalink |
There is a perception at my office that an MBA degree is valuable. I have even been told by upper management that the position I'm in is as high as I will go unless I get my MBA degree. All of my bosses and coworkers have their degrees, but I don't as I agree with everything you have listed above.
How do I get promoted in an office that places so much value on a dying degree? I do not want to be overlooked just because I don't have an MBA degree.
Posted by Aubrey on August 29, 2011 at 4:20 pm | permalink |
Aubrey, I feel for you. I have an MBA and have progressed much faster in my career than other people equally talented but without an MBA. In a Fortune 100 company, that will often be the case, and no matter how logic Penelope's arguments are, this preference for a degree still holds true. Fortunately for me I got my MBA outside the U.S. for a fraction of the cost, so the cost-benefit in my case was huge.
Posted by Chris M. on August 29, 2011 at 5:29 pm | permalink |
Hi Chris M. Could you do me the favor of telling me where you got your MBA outside of the United States. I'm looking at programs in Spain and Brazil. Programs in the former are incredibly expensive. Programs in the latter are cheap, but I'm worried about their transferability to the U.S. market. I would love to hear your thoughts/opinions. Thanks!
Posted by CT on August 29, 2011 at 8:31 pm | permalink |
It's all well and good to stay out of school if you use the time wisely. The advantage is that college directs you to awareness of areas you might not study on your own, increase your awareness of the complexities of the world, examine areas that you are weak in (and could improve on), and provide you a structure toward completion of projects. Most people without direction will waste the college years on the same thing as in college, parties, alcohol and sex, without the directed study and exams.
Posted by Crane on August 29, 2011 at 4:37 pm | permalink |
The trouble is, if you look at how this situation evolved, and look at the job postings for many higher end jobs, it is clear that Corporate America created this dilemma. A college degree, and usually at least a masters degree, is used as a screening tool by business. Check out the job postings for professional positions. Many of them require at least a Masters in the field, or in a related field.
Now with the "new colonialism" movement, exploiting cheap off-shore labor resources, they are transferring the same scam to other countries.
The other thing that I don't see in your post is the acknowledgement of how difficult it is to complete a masters degree, let alone a PhD, and what that says about the individual. This may not be true for all fields of study, but it is for most. I don't have any statistics to share, but think it would be interesting to know what the drop out rate is for Graduate Schools. I doubt if schools are anxious to give that information out, but I suspect the most common graduate degree is the DnF, for "did not finish".
Posted by Steve C on August 29, 2011 at 4:40 pm | permalink |
Actually, corporate america got so career focused once the EEOC and various 'civil rights' lawsuits made them afraid of being accused of discrimination if they (the employers) simply used aptitude or IQ tests to more directly screen for sharper talent.
The degree is a no-risk proxy for a more direct assessment.
Posted by newscaper on September 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm | permalink |
I would point out that large corporations get many, perhaps most, of their employees these days by buying smaller companies. Further, the small company (now a division of the megacorp) is given wide discretion on who they hire after the acquisition, sharply contrasting with how megacorps quickly centralize IT, accounting, travel and often even sales. I see that as a tacit admission that their credential-oriented hiring practices are a poor way of screening for real talent.
Posted by M. Rad. on September 4, 2011 at 6:45 pm | permalink |
Interesting point.
Posted by Steve C on September 5, 2011 at 7:10 pm | permalink |
Interesting point.
Posted by Steve C on September 5, 2011 at 7:10 pm | permalink |
Corporate America USED to just give tests to see if you were qualified to do the job. Then those were deemed wrong and were made illegal.
So, who would be making laws that cause people to not get jobs? I suppose it will be a cold day in hell before you blame "Big Government"
Posted by ErikZ on September 4, 2011 at 5:02 pm | permalink |
ErikZ. So, having laws is big government? Somebody sued, somebody lost. Tests with built-in biases were probably outlawed, but not all tests. Even a temp agency can test your abilities before they will refer you for a temp job. This is one of the reasons why companies contract with them. They assume the risk of hiring that companies normally would have to bear.
Posted by Steve C on September 5, 2011 at 6:41 pm | permalink |
I have to agree with a point brought up by another commenter that these post graduate degrees are merely requirements for alot of jobs because those that have acheived positions where they are making the hiring decisions had to go get them themselves. Why on earth would they want to make things easier for the generations coming after them? THAT is human thinking too. We want to make things easier for our kids, but certainly not for our younger colleagues. By the way, I did not go to university or college. I started working right after highschool and I did just as well if not better than my friends who did go. Funny thing is, I just quit my almost six figure job to focus on my own company! I`m as poor as a church mouse right now but the freedom I feel right now is absolutely marvelous.
Posted by Helen on August 29, 2011 at 4:48 pm | permalink |
Thanks for posting this! I have been wrestling with this myself and have recently decided to not pursue grad school right now because I'd rather get real experience and not sink deeper into debt!
Posted by krysia on August 29, 2011 at 5:04 pm | permalink |
Penelope, I love your style. You always make a strong point and crack me up while doing it. This is my first time commenting but I've been lurking for a while. I'm a big fan. I see some complaining about overgeneralizations, but that is the brilliance of your writing….which inspires countless interactions.
For the most part, I agree with your main argument here and do feel that grad degrees in the humanities are a bubble waiting to burst. At my attorney search firm, I would often receive resumes from potential candidates who earned a long list of impressive degrees…but I would look at those resumes and think, "you're almost 40 and you've NEVER worked before – what's WRONG with you?!"
At the same time, corporate America so often bows down to MBA grads. I don't understand why, because other than uttering acronyms in every sentence (ROI, RFP, POC), I'm not clear on what added value the MBA brings to the job. But I've seen companies hire and promote them time and time again over those with no MBA degrees.
Although a law degree has become prohibitively expensive and I thoroughly disagree with the fact that it's a 3-year program that focuses on theory (rather than a practical system like med school with on-the-job rotations), I still think it's a great degree for some people. It can be a great route with a variety of paths. Unless/until the government stops requiring law school to take and pass the BAR exam, there's still a need for the degree for those who want in to that profession despite the overcrowding.
And like the Marriage/Family therapist-to-be said above, there are certain careers that just require an additional degree for licensure, etc.
The bottom line is that no grad degree, especially in this economy, is going to get anyone a job. Networking and being a self-starter are still the most important. And if someone can turn those 2 things into gold without taking on the additional debt of a grad degree, they should.
Posted by Marc Luber on August 29, 2011 at 5:10 pm | permalink |
Excellent points, I think. Especially the last paragraph. I would add, though, that in the really prestigious institutions, the network/connections with alumni and fellow peers is at least half the value of the degree obtained, if not more. It's like a continuation of those legacy programs which got many of the students into the institutions in the first place. Someone wrote an article(maybe part of a study) some years back about women in leadership positions in Corporate America. They found that a significant percentage of them had two things in common: 1)at least a BS/BA in economics, and 2)they graduated from a prestigious women's college in Massachusetts(I think it was
Wellesley, but I could be mistaken). It was the mentoring/networking with Alums that opened the doors for these women. You still have to work it though.
Posted by Steve C on August 29, 2011 at 11:39 pm | permalink |
Didn't you just tell women to get MBAs a few weeks ago?!
I think grad school has to be an intrinsic need. Maybe it won't get you a better paying job — but maybe it will give you those two years of sanity you need, or two years of deciding what you actually want to do — which then helps you get the right job!
Posted by Natalie on August 29, 2011 at 5:17 pm | permalink |
School and university are some of humanities greatest achievements, doing everything by an apprenticeship system puts us back to the middle ages. And dutch (and german) university tuition is so much cheaper for the individual student because the federal government pays the equivalent of tuition to keep the universities going. Education is considered to be so valuable that taxes are used to keep it going, and at a high level in terms of quality. Imagine the outcry on this blog if someone would come up with the idea to pay taxes to make graduate education accessible to everybody who intellectually qualifies.
Posted by redrock on August 29, 2011 at 5:22 pm | permalink |
Ah, yes… that old chestnut "The federal government pays…" Let's be more specific: "Taxpayers subsidize the value of your degree from which they will never see a return."
That's certainly an admirable system they've got over there (and in Canada, where I used to live.) The able and talented free ride on the taxes of the poor and middle classes. Further compelling argument for dramatically less government.
I've got a good idea. Why don't you pay me to do what I want. 'Cause it's no different from the way in which the Europeans and Canadians (and state universities and colleges in the U.S.) finance higher education on the backs of taxpayers.
Lord; think clearly, please.
Posted by Andrew on September 1, 2011 at 8:26 pm | permalink |
Andrew, I think you have to add every developing economy/government to your list that now seems to only include European and Canadian governments and economies. There is a simple reason why these countries all do this: they all recognize that it is better to have more smart people than to have more dumb people. They also recognize that it is better to have more skilled people than less. One of the reasons this is the case is that there is an expected ROI on this investment in the form of increased economic activity, and more valuable economic activity.
I suspect you believe that private industry will just step up to the plate and educate all these individuals on their own dime. Perhaps, but I doubt it.
What is missing the guarantee that there will be a pay back, maybe in the form of a term of service to repay the investment. Of course, there actually need to be jobs to fill in order for this to take place. It seems to me a lot of people could be doing jobs that are being cut, if there was a liveable wage attached.
The way that capitalism is right now, given the global labor force, there is excess labor everywhere in world, because even businesses in Ohio or Alaska have to consider the labor pool in China, if everyone else is doing it.
The money flows to the countries where the need can be met. And the best jobs go to the most highly skilled workers. That goes hand in hand with education.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 12:46 pm | permalink |
"The able and talented free ride on the taxes of the poor and middle classes." Apparently without realizing it, you have just succinctly defined the upper 2% of our malfunctioning Capitalist society. You really ought to take a hard look at some of the predictions Marx made regarding capitalism. You won't like them.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 12:54 pm | permalink |
"The able and talented free ride on the taxes of the poor and middle classes." Apparently without realizing it, you have just succinctly defined the upper 2% of our malfunctioning Capitalist society. You really ought to take a hard look at some of the predictions Marx made regarding capitalism. You won't like them.
You have just succinctly described every political economic system in which some group is empowered to take some other group's money and redistribute it. In "capitalism" which is presently actually corporatism/cronyism it's the well connected 1% and in socialism it's SURPRISE the well connected 1%.
Posted by Bladedoc on September 4, 2011 at 2:51 pm | permalink |
I just saw two online postings for jobs that required only a GED. They were not that well paid (8.00 – 10.00 an hour) but as entry level positions, one for a mechanic, the other for a secretary they could be a stepping stone to better things. Medical benefits and some retirement program benefits were also included. Getting your foot in the door it is still better than living with Mom and Dad forever. You can move up the ladder to something better once your reputation is established within the organization. Taking online classes in your spare time is also an option if you want an advanced degree.
Posted by Leslie on August 29, 2011 at 6:10 pm | permalink |
I'm wondering what area of the country these jobs were posted in that an $8-$10 per hour job is going to move you out of mom and dad's house and into our own place. I think you are superimposing a 1960's cost of living onto the new millenium.
Posted by Steve C on August 29, 2011 at 11:43 pm | permalink |
yakima, WA. Buying a house and living pretty okay on a starting average wage (for both husband and I) at that range.
Posted by karelys davis on August 30, 2011 at 9:31 am | permalink |
I have a cum laude degree in Cinema Arts from the University of Southern California, and graduated with a 3.8 average. When interviewing for my first jobs, and my second jobs, actually ALL of my job, not ONE interviewer ever asked about my grades or college. What DID they want to know? They asked about my previous jobs, even when I didn't have any. Eventually I DID rack up some "previous jobs" only to discover…what took me two years to learn in film school I could have absorbed in two months working in real production.
But that was then. Today USC is incredibly cutting age and I'm sure students learn usable skills which emulate the industry's demands. And the grads have a job placement service too. Good for them. I never had that opportunity. And I'm glad I didn't.
Thinking back, a week before graduation, my mentor asked me what I was going to do on the "Outside" having made my A's in film school. I told him I was going to write and direct movies. He said, "You should spend some time pumping gas. Then you'll have something to write about." He was so right. For the first five years out of school I struggled to pay the rent with strange and bizarre jobs I grabbed solely for the money, or because they easily opened up to me. They had nothing to do with the film industry and everything to do with living and writing about it. It was the best of times. It was the worst of times. And I don't regret a second of that adventure.
Irv
Posted by Irving Podolsky on August 29, 2011 at 6:23 pm | permalink |
Penelope: Your article addresses non-science degrees. But, what's your opinion on Masters in Engineering degrees?
Posted by Jon on August 29, 2011 at 6:41 pm | permalink |
I agree with you most of the time Penelope; however, I am pursuing a doc. in psych. You should be given an honorary degree. I started when I left my corporate job and have been quite happy so far. I do miss my six figure salary and my unlimited expense account. I did not become a lawyer as was planned. I took the another route ten years later. I am terrified a lot of the time- on my own, divorced and no one to support me financially. Funny, I was so angry before, wanting to break you down. I am happy with what I am doing and so are you? I appreciate the HONESTY! Tough week in NY.
Posted by c on August 29, 2011 at 6:51 pm | permalink |
What if I am paid to go to grad school? This is actually my case. I am being paid to become and expert in my field and while I do this, I am doing some writing gigs about it on my own. I am sure I could get more money actually doing a job, but I wouldn't get to meet all the people I meet now or improve my knowledge. If doing a job would be such a great way of learning there wouldn't be so many people out there waiting for years to get up the ladder (and I think "waiting" is the essential word here, because they are not doing anything to get better or get paid better or learn more).
Posted by Alina RÄdulescu on August 29, 2011 at 7:13 pm | permalink |
So great to see that you are back to arguing a side I can completely agree with. That being said, it would be wonderful to get this argument in front of the myriad of employers out there who are still requiring bachelors degrees for entry level employment and masters degrees for any positions of significant power, despite the fact that the piece of paper is functionally useless in both situations.
Posted by Deena McClusky on August 29, 2011 at 7:18 pm | permalink |
Deena, great point. Employers use the bachelor degree as a crutch, I think. Employers assume that if someone can pull themselves together to get a BA then they have passed some sort of hurdle. But many people can pass those same intellectual/self-discipline hurdles without getting a BA — it just takes a smarter hiring environment to see that.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on August 29, 2011 at 7:30 pm | permalink |
Like I told Steve C. you're partly barking up the wrong tree here — the real solution is the older way where many employers gave aptitude or what were effectively – if not in reality – IQ tests. Enough 'discrimination' lawsuits starting in the 1970s to kill that cheap alternative to the BA.
Now the BA requirement lets the corporation have someone else assume that risk — at much greater cost to the job candidate of course.
Posted by newscaper on September 4, 2011 at 3:31 pm | permalink |
newscaper. Isn't this what I was saying? I didn't go into the cause of the shift, ie lawsuits, because I wasn't really aware of that, but I wouldn't argue with it. All I was saying is businesses have clearly shifted the screening process to Colleges and Universities. The thing I wonder about is whether they like it this way or not? Apparently, according to the HR people who have posted, they do not.
Here's an anecdotal tid-bit you might find interesting. In the 1950's, most of my dad's close friends were in management at Ford Motor Company. At some point, and I forget why(maybe one of the Ford son's ascended to upper management), Ford decreed that all management level personnel needed to have a college degree. This was back in the day when admissions was something you had to qualify for. Most of these guys had spent their entire careers at Ford, worked their way up from the shop floors,and knew the business inside and out. All of them were terminated, as far as I know. They were all in their mid to late 50's. Needless to say, it was pretty hard on them. I wonder what drove that paradigm shift?(no pun intended).
Posted by Steve C on September 5, 2011 at 7:08 pm | permalink |
I figure a humanities/liberal arts degree is a real degree, and a career degree is a compromise. I got a career degree, but I tried to compensate by going to free guest lectures, joining student clubs and mingling lots.
A few years ago I took a night class at tech school, while joking at work, "Everyone knows tech school gets you a job." I took A History of World Film. (The school has a film career program) When I retire, instead of traveling I will go back to university full time and find out what I missed out on by "having to" prepare for a job.
Posted by Sean Crawford on August 29, 2011 at 8:19 pm | permalink |
I strongly agree with your comments. My experience is that people without college degrees often are simply not intellectually developed in areas related to critical thinking, and the humanities – and I think that the humanities broaden our field of understanding as citizens and community members. So, I am sad to see so many negative perceptions of general education. I think that academia was created to provide a broad scop of personal development, and that buying into the brianwashing of making ourselves workers above all else, is a tragic commentary on Capitalism and how it's dumbing down our species.
Posted by Michael Feliciano on August 31, 2011 at 1:29 am | permalink |
Michael. Agree. The fundamental reason for all graduate level study has long since been turned on its head, and I don't believe it is necessarily for the better. Still, for all the angry posters out there, I think it is better to be angry and educated, than to be angry and ignorant. Maybe not on an individual basis, but for a functional, rational society, yes.
Posted by Steve C on September 3, 2011 at 1:51 pm | permalink |
While I would agree with a bulk of this post, it is not entirely valid. I would contend that graduate school can be a waste of time and money if it is a mediocre graduate program without a recognized name or a quality of student that will develop one's intellect and career connections. Having a top tier graduate degree on your resume, however, can and does open elite doors much faster than does attempting to start your career without it.
Posted by The Cake on August 29, 2011 at 8:19 pm | permalink |
I'm curious as to how you divide fields. You mention "non-science" and "humanities," with an aside about law school. You do realize there are other large categories of study, right? Clinical psychology, social work, etc.?
Also, I really have no desire to ever work for another company as an employee again. Some of us don't fit what they're looking for and don't want to. That hardly makes us foolish. It makes us self-employed.
Posted by Tzipporah on August 29, 2011 at 8:25 pm | permalink |
How do you feel about dental school? I've always thought that dental school is well worth it for those who truly want to fix teeth. You've never told us, Penelope. Do you think your graduate degree was useless? To be clear, your post does not threaten me or my plans in any way. I'm just curious.
Posted by CT on August 29, 2011 at 8:25 pm | permalink |
The whole college status thing is very American and maybe Asian. Or maybe it was different when I was college age in Amsterdam, but I always thought you went to college to learn a job. I patched some courses together while modeling then went back to college in London, paid for it myself and could not believe it when the professors gave me shit because I felt they worked for me, I paid them plenty! I left before graduating because i got a great job offer (fashion design) and never gave degrees etc. another thought. Until I came to New York. Husband grew up on campus @ Princeton, went to grad @ Yale, acts like my flaw is that i did not graduate, (well FU I made six figures when I met you and you did NOT!) Now when I hear people say about sending their kids to liberal arts colleges like Vassar, "Oh, I'm not sure what Britanny really will do withe her art history degree, but it was was great for networking" I do not shut up. I, like P, get heated, and yell why spend all those hundreds of thousands unless you are very clear on what you want to do and need to study for this? Like doctor, lawyer, vet, dentist, architect etc. otherwise just learn as you go, challenge yourself in all the areas that interest you. take courses but most importantly start in the field you feel passionate about…. at the bottom if need be…
Posted by barbi on August 29, 2011 at 8:28 pm | permalink |
"start in the field you feel passionate about"
At the end of 12 years of elementary and high school, it's a wonder if people are passionate about anything. Passion is a rare commodity these days.
Posted by Tzipporah on August 30, 2011 at 7:20 am | permalink |
Oh please just get off line and start to travel, like P said read, volunteer with Americorp, whatever it takes. Opening your mind is free and if you open yourself up to finding passion, believe me anyone can find it!
Posted by barbi on August 30, 2011 at 10:51 am | permalink |
Thanks for your post Penelope! In Blueprint for a Woman's Life you suggested that women should "go to business school right out of the gate". Although that lesson was slightly different, isn't an MBA a non-science degree? Looks like someone else had a similar question regarding your definition. I am 36 and in a management position at a financial services company. While there are certain skills that I might still be lacking I don't see the benefit of getting an MBA, at least not in terms of cost-effectiveness (even though I don't want children). I wish there were better continuing education programs to achieve the same goal. Any suggestions?
Posted by Stephanie on August 29, 2011 at 10:37 pm | permalink |
I'm getting paid to attend grad school in the humanities at a State University in exchange for teaching undergrads. I chose a low cost of living metro area, have full medical/dental insurance and lots of independence regarding how I allot my time (though my responsibilities require 60-70hr workweeks).
I have time to be a musician on the side, my hours are flexible so I can fit in exercise and socializing to maintain my physical and social health, and I couldn't be happier.
I have an employable science undergrad degree which I expected to fall back on after I had my grad school experience. However, it seems everyone in my program that works hard lands tenure-track humanities jobs. I'm told I'll be even more employable than the successful TT landers ahead of me because I'm bringing in outside knowledge to my interdisciplinary humanities degree.
Many humanities AND science PhDs are ridiculously unemployable, but if you bring in outside knowledge and choose your program carefully, you can find pockets of thriving humanities. You need to go searching and ask a lot of questions, though. You can't just expect to magically fall into those places. You've got to play chess and position yourself correctly.
Posted by Al on August 29, 2011 at 11:39 pm | permalink |
The points you bring up a pretty valid.Unless it is in certain fields or there are certain work requirements, then grad school is pretty much over hyped.It is supposed to train you to "think" in a certain way,(that's why they have the GRE,GMAT,LSAT,MCAT before even getting accepted) to test your analytical evaluation of situations which by the way you can train yourself even better by exposure to real life experiences.Nevertheless,there is a crucial disconnect between what you learn and what is needed in the field.I am not sure if faculty and employers actually sit together to create cirriculums that are relevant and applicable in today's work environment.Is it a miracle that online education has recently been on the rise? Despite the social responsibility of providing training to the residents and citizens of a locality,we have to constantly remind ourselves that they are still businesses. Our only concern is not whether the education is needed,(you will need some form of knowledge formal or informal to elevate and leverage your capacity for bringing worthwhile ideas to the table that offer solutions to existing problems)but the direct correlation with who we are, what we desire and the results we expect. I guess that is the main disconnect that drove a good number of dropouts to follow their own quest.
Posted by Lee Kariuki on August 29, 2011 at 11:43 pm | permalink |
Great article! Do you consider undergraduate (Bachelor of Arts) degrees for foreign languages in the same category as other humanities degrees in regards to how well they prepare for career paths? While maybe not as advantageous as STEM subjects can the ability to speak and write at the BA/business level in other major languages in addition to English help add value to the employability of a undergrad humanities degree?
Also what are your thoughts on MFA degrees in the visual arts/playwriting/film etc. which tend to be industry/internship oriented? Not that you need an MFA (or even a GED) for arts careers which are primarily portfolio (and network) based, however Ive never really seen these programs discussed in your grad school postings–and fine arts MFA's can differ dramatically from MA and phD programs– so would appreciate your insight.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Keep up the great writing!
Posted by Biancaelyse1 on August 29, 2011 at 11:44 pm | permalink |
I do have opinions on this. Because I went to grad school for creative writing and my ex husband went to grad school at UCLA for film. In both cases, if you are good, you don't need school. And if you are not good, school can't help.
For creative writing, you need to sit in a room every day and write. And get tons of feedback, which you absolutely do not need grad school for, and then send out a finished manuscript. And then do it again. And again. Great writers float to the top. If you're not great, no teacher can help you with connections.
For film, you need to have a lot of money or a day job. Because you have to get your films done, which costs money, and you have to work on other peoples' films for free. It's a very hard life. And in hollywood most internships are unpaid. You get them by networking, not by going to film classes at UCLA.
Making a living as a creative person is very, very hard. It's waking up every day and doing the work, unnoticed, and unpaid, for years and years. Grad school is not a quick fix to get out of the drudgery. Some people get incredibly lucky. Don't plan to be one of those people because luck does not need planning for. Plan to be a regular, very talented person.
Bottom line: No grad school in creative fields.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on August 30, 2011 at 1:20 am | permalink |
"if you are good, you don't need school. And if you are not good, school can't help." This reminds me of a cruel quip by a very grand mathematician (at the Collège de France in Paris). He said there were only two types of students: those who don't need him and those whom *he* doesn't need.
Posted by Olivier on August 30, 2011 at 1:25 pm | permalink |
Thank you for answering my earlier comment about MFA degrees/Grad school for the arts, writing, etc. Its extremely helpfull to see it spelled out so clearly–in black and white digital ink–on the page especially since (all things considered) the truth is that I would much rather be sitting in a room making art–be it film, poetry, playwriting, painting, and/or some other type of medium/mixed of mediums anything to tell the/a story–rather then sitting in a classroom studying it (nevermind the fact/question of if artistic expression is even studyable in the first place). So…followup question, if I may, what are some good ressources for artists to learn about the bussiness side of the contemporary art world? Ive mostly been reading bussiness or art publications–are there any ressources that talk about both–especially for unknown artists? Thank you again for your time and consideration.
Posted by Biancaelyse1 on August 31, 2011 at 12:44 am | permalink |
If you are good at foreign languages and can become fluent in several, you can make a living just translating, or become a CIA operative. I can't believe that having foreign language skills and degrees would not be very rewarding.
Posted by Steve C on September 2, 2011 at 6:56 pm | permalink |
What sets you apart when applying for a job when everyone and their mom have a degree just like you?
Most people are go to college b/c that's what they're supposed to do… that's what I did. I didn't even think I had a choice. Half way through I decided to major in myself and make a big game out of the whole thing. And it works.
The internet and a dose of curiosity can teach you just about anything you desire. Look what I just found:
College Conspiracy Documentary:
http://inflation.us/videos.html
It's not too late… teach the children… to teach themselves
Posted by Justin-to-the-good-stuff on August 30, 2011 at 2:07 am | permalink |
You make this argument and a lot and it's clearly paying dividends. It's a brilliant topic. You should write it more often. However, you're an example that disproves the argument. If you didn't gone on to get an English degree, you wouldn't be the writer you are now, and none of us would be up at 1 am arguing about graduate school.
You were a professional volleyball player who's difficult to work with and terrible at start ups. Yet, today, you're one of the most successful bloggers, and you merely linking to a good website is enough to make it successful.
If you hadn't gone to graduate school, the rest of us would be worse off, and we'd be deprived of your wonderful stories. Not because you wouldn't write wonderful stories, but because we wouldn't have the opportunity to read them.
Graduate school is a scam. It's another tool for the rich to take advantage of the poor. But, the poor can't fix it simply by skipping graduate school. We're going to be poor for generations whether we go to grad school or not.
There are still ways to maximize your graduate school experience:
1. Get your degree by the time you're 22. (Otherwise she's write, you look unemployable instead of smart)
2. Don't borrow money more than $30,000. You'll still be paying it back when you're paying for your children to go to college otherwise.
3. Don't go to grad school for an education. Grad school's saving grace is connections. You won't get a great job on Craigslist, but you will be handed the perfect job because you know the star employee. You aren't going to meet them while getting drunk at your local bar.
Posted by Greg on August 30, 2011 at 2:46 am | permalink |
It's a shame your blog isn't set up to allow comments to be edited.
Perhaps if I had a degree in English, my writing would have fewer errors and I wouldn't need an edit button.
At least my tech degree made me better at setting up blog commenting systems… though I'd probably still be up at 1am unsuccessfully promoting my blog.
Posted by Greg on August 30, 2011 at 2:51 am | permalink |
I agree, especially with #1. If nothing else, you have more time to recover from the sunk cost(time and money)that you incurred if Grad school turns out to be a bust; and I think you are correct that you get more credibility out of the degree if you complete it when you are younger. You are also more likely to much more flexible in terms of where you a willing and able to relocate to in search of a position capitalizing on your degree. That is a biggie if you ask me.
I also agree that it's unlikely that we would be reading Penelope's blog had she not chosen English as her graduate degree.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 3:44 pm | permalink |
I went to grad school for a non-science degree, while I worked, and while I had an internship. I can honestly say the degree helped me land all of my jobs – especially my current one. I work in health care and they care a lot about credentials, even for the non-science jobs. I also got my first job because of networking my grad school helped me with (I was hired by an alum). I agree that everyone should carefully decide what to do with their education/career, but I can't categorically say non-science grad school is not worth it.
Posted by Megan on August 30, 2011 at 5:21 am | permalink |
I'm still curious to hear Penelope's take on grad school for science degrees. Equally useless? Or a different animal?
Posted by Jon on August 30, 2011 at 6:52 am | permalink |
I do not know her opinion but father's opinion was: Do not get a science degree. Get a related engineering degree. You can still get the science jobs and now you have access to the engineering jobs. Where if you only have the science degree, you often can not have access to engineering jobs.
He has a PHD in one of the science fields and he has been dealing with this issue his entire life
Posted by Jake on August 30, 2011 at 8:44 am | permalink |
I hate the 'my parents are paying for it' argument. If you don't think it's a good way to spend your money, it's probably not a good way to spend anyone else's, either.
Posted by my honest answer on August 30, 2011 at 5:41 am | permalink |
Ok you've discussed humanities, what about art school's? I have a step daughter that graduated from RISD, great reputation but no preparation for how to make a living with the talent.
Posted by Carl on August 30, 2011 at 8:16 am | permalink |
I'm sticking to my comment that Helen's suggestion to Beth, to simply leave off any mention of a graduate degree in humanities on your resume, is bad advice. I mean, a lot of graduate school experiences take up even more than two years. That's a pretty good sized hole to have to paper over with a fake story about a trek to Nepal or something. Why not just make up a whole fantasy life and resume then? I say flat out lying about your background is bad advice.
I've heard this advice before, and I'm sure it has worked before, as you pointed out; but for every time it has worked, my guess is that there have been many, many failures we'll never hear about, and many people who get caught up in falsehoods further down the road, once they get started down that path.
It seems to me that just pointing out that even though you now have second thoughts about your decision to start graduate school, you wanted to follow through on a personal commitment and not quit in mid-stream is enough of a "re-framing" to put a positive spin on the experience.
It's also okay to admit that you were good at the finishing grad school part but not so good at the putting it to work part. I think the the trick is to somehow network your way around the Human Resources gatekeepers, and let go of the hope for a better past.
BTW, Penelope, I got a comment of yours in my email notifications that doesn't seem to be here on the blog. It was a pretty intense comment. Did you pull that for a reason?
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 8:17 am | permalink |
While I broadly agree with PT I think she is being unduly harsh with the degree takers. The main driver of degree inflation is not a surge of muddle-headed thinking in the student-aged population but rampant credentialism in the workplace, whether in the private or public sector. I think it's just a form of entropy, of civilizational decay.
Posted by Olivier on August 30, 2011 at 8:30 am | permalink |
Speak for yourself — while unemployed and laid off for the 3rd time – I choose to make better use of my time, while applying to jobs in my field. Don't bash those of us who choose to "expand our horizons". Grad school is pricey – nobody said it would be cheap. To each his own.
Posted by Jennifer on August 30, 2011 at 8:56 am | permalink |
Ok, so if baby boomers are going to retire in my lifetime, and those jobs are going to open up to me, how will I set myself apart. Everyone is going to have a BA. Everyone at that point is going to have the same amount of experience-give or take two years is not going to matter. Besides quality of experience, which you should be able to frame anyway, I think a masters will be something that puts me back up in the top tier. Am I wrong?
Posted by Jake on August 30, 2011 at 10:18 am | permalink |
Unless you're under age 10, we're not going to retire in your lifetime. We're going to live forever and because we've just lost our retirement portfolio, we won't be able to retire.
Posted by avant garde designer on August 31, 2011 at 2:53 pm | permalink |
Penelope, you're missing one key indicator. If you do not get funded for graduate school that is a very strong signal you won't make it in the academic market. However, you might get funded (ideally a fellowship, maybe a TA ship),and while it is slave labor, it obviates the debt issue and increases your confidence in getting that rare academic posting. Most grad programs are pretty good at sorting folks who are serious about the subject from those who fear leaving school- and denying funding to the later.
The folks without funding are the kinds who drop out after a semester or a year because they discover that humanities graduate programs are about theory and methods, not just learning more about the things that they liked as an undergraduate.
Paying for school is not wise, getting paid at least keeps you in the game.
Posted by Alex on August 30, 2011 at 10:23 am | permalink |
+1
Posted by Matt Weber on August 30, 2011 at 4:52 pm | permalink |
Great discussion. While I agree with most of the points in this post, I defend my decision to get an M.Ed. in teaching writing, luckily for free, in my 40's.
I wanted to adjunct at the local community college one or two nights a week and I couldn't even get them to look at me without a graduate degree.
Plus, grad school was fun and gave me good connections.
Posted by HopeinNH on August 30, 2011 at 10:28 am | permalink |
Everyone is having a tough time finding jobs in our current economy. The economic conditions changed in a short period of time in 2008 and has continued in the same state more or less since. Jobs are scarce in many disciplines, including teaching.
To argue that a graduate degree is a waste of time and money is short sighted in my opinion. If you want to teach in Massachusetts, you need a masters, so go to graduate school. In other disciplines, eg history, a historian needs time to develop a thesis and write; graduate school allows that opportunity.
In science and technology careers, graduate degrees are expected. You'll get jobs with a BS, but there is a ceiling in many cases unless you have an advanced degree.
I think your rebuttal arguments are sarcastic and short-sighted. Your arguments against the 6th and 7th are the only ones with merit in my opinion, and the 6th one depends on what job you apply for.
The economy will change. Jobs will become available when the economy improves. Those people with advanced degrees are likely to be the first ones to get jobs when it does.
Lastly, graduate school is work–at least it is in science and technology. It may not be work that business people appreciate, but it is work nonetheless.
Joe
Posted by Joe on August 30, 2011 at 11:16 am | permalink |
I made the decision to go to Grad school for my MBA despite hearing Penelope and Ramit saying it's a waste of time and money. They actually told me that in a webinar I participated in. I did it anyway but still had that thought in the back of my mind. Because of that, I made sure that I included work experience by doing an internship in the summer which was a very valuable learning experience and filled the gaps in my graduate program. The MBA plus internship boosted my confidence, thickened my skin, and allowed me to see opportunities I didn't see before. Also, without the MBA, I wouldn've have gotten the internship. We'll have to wait and see if there was a signicant ROI in my decision to get the MBA as I just completed the program a few days ago.
Now, my MBA would probably mean nothing without experience. I believe experience trumps over a graduate degree by itself.
I believe it's best to get a graduate degree if: (1) you need it to get promoted, (2)you want to be a teacher, physical therapist, psychologist, doctor,and etc. where it's a requirement, (3) if your place of employment has a tuition assistance program and the grad program will increase your skills in your specific job.
Posted by Art on August 30, 2011 at 11:32 am | permalink |
Massive overgeneralization. What about grad degrees that are necessary if a person wants to obtain a professional licensure, and otherwise would not be able to work in that field?!
Posted by Valerie on August 30, 2011 at 11:41 am | permalink |
First sentence: "[N]on-science degrees are not necessary for a job."
If you can't read, school probably doesn't help either…
Posted by Lori on August 30, 2011 at 1:41 pm | permalink |
I so wish I could have read this when my daughter dropped out of high school 2 years ago. I did the whole grad school thing myself and since she is bright I'd always assumed she'd do the same…..so I had no clue how to advise her when she took another route.
She got herself a job as a receptionist at the Holiday Inn near Bristol airport (UK) because she thought she might like to do event management. It has been a fruitful employment and I have seen her grow from the one who'd throw a sickie because of a night on the tiles in Bristol to the one they push to front of house each time there's a difficult customer to calm.
Now she is about to live a dream that has been in her head for over 2 years. She is putting desire into practical action in a way that i think would be difficult thro a conventional channel. This Thursday she has organized a ball to raise money to build a library for a tiny school off the beaten track, in the bush just north of Mombasa. The school is a relative known quantity because we've been before but the organization of the ball and living in Kenya is a whole new thing, and a big thing at 19 years of age.
I'm very proud of my daughter for battling thro conventional wisdom and having the courage to strike out on her own
Posted by Jane on August 30, 2011 at 4:50 pm | permalink |
@ Steve C – re low poets
FWIW I was refering to you with the "insightful commenters" LOL.
Posted by Cat on August 30, 2011 at 8:23 pm | permalink |
I'm flattered, really. BTW, I agree with your comment. As for "low poets", I think you ought to run with it. The Low Poets Society, or something. It has a nice ring to it.
Posted by Steve C on August 30, 2011 at 8:54 pm | permalink |
If you do anything for the wrong reasons you will most certainly fail. In such cases motivation isn't there to push your through the hard times.
If you go to grad school without "knowing why", "to satisfy others" (parents, peers, etc), or simply because "there is nothing else", then your mistake was starting a long-term commitment without the right motivations. You will simply burn out.
If you instead take that tuition money (as someone pointed out) and start your own business in a field you are "not passionate about", "don't understand", or simply "don't like", you too will fail.
There are exceptions to both of these, of course, but this is the norm. If you don't have any skills or passions and go the non-grad school route, you at least have a better chance of not starving.
The benefits of not going to grad school is at least being employable. Owning a business you learn to wear many hats, and this I believe makes you a great candidate for a related position in a larger company once your business has run its course.
A Master's teaches you (or at least should) to think about a topic in depth, (PhD also teaches you how to do research), or if it's not a research degree (course based), it teaches you to think in broad terms and consider many possibilities. This often involves reading more publications rather than writing them. If you fail at your degree, you should at least take away some skills in thinking objectively.
For the commenters who noted that some HR/Managers only hire people with degrees, that is a sad truth. A graduate comes with a guarantee. The guarantee is not that the applicant is good, but that hiring a bad applicant with a degree is less risky than hiring a bad applicant without a degree. For positions that don't require any research experience but need practical experience, working experience should be enough. Sadly, as someone else pointed out, many HR personnel simply follow guidelines, without putting too much thought into each applicant. In their defence, however, when you have to go through 100 applications in 1 hour, some key characteristics they look for are going to make or break your chances of landing that job.
Of course if you're a prodigy then grad school is not required to be rich. It is still required to teach at a graduate level…. usually.
Posted by Academic Vs Biz on August 31, 2011 at 12:02 am | permalink |
In almost all cases, I agree, and I would also extend these to those considering science graduate degrees, too. I have a graduate degree in a science field, and I'm teacher/scholar a research university. It's probably heresy for me to agree, but I see too many students fail out because they've chosen graduate school for the wrong reasons. I think students should only choose graduate school if the job the student wants requires it, and they've exhausted all other options to get that job. If the student doesn't know what that job they want, grad school isn't going to help them figure it out.
Posted by K on August 31, 2011 at 8:31 am | permalink |
I can't figure out why a woman who is so ardently determined to walk her own path — career-wise, love-wise, in raising her children, you name it — would decide to denigrate anyone else's path or choices.
I guess you could make the argument — which you did — that you're trying to save people the pain of "wasting" money on something you don't value. Fair enough.
But the common thread in so many of your posts is self-validation. I did this, you should. I found this to be true of something, so it's true. I made this choice, and you're a chickenshit if you can't make the same one. Even when you say, "I wouldn't recommend this", you still couch things in the context of your own "courage" and risk-taking.
Perhaps this will truly help people who feel that a graduate degree is painfully unavoidable. They will feel more empowered *not* to pursue one.
But here's the thing: if those folks needed a blogger to tell them they don't have to do something, they're not ready to take control of their lives and careers yet. If they needed you to list arguments against grad school so they could defend their decision not to go, they're not sure enough of their decision, and won't be able to stand behind it if someone effectively trounces one of your points.
If people want to go to grad school, they should. If they don't, they shouldn't. If they're feeling pressured, that's something they'll have to develop the strength to handle.
And if you need to mock or put down what other people choose to make you feel good about your life, then you don't feel as good as you think you do.
I keep waiting for you to own something without torturing yourself or shouting at people that disagree.
Posted by Meg on August 31, 2011 at 8:43 am | permalink |
EVERYONE should go to undergrad then grad and get their degrees!
Yup, the guy at the fast-food window can ask me if I want fries with that without shame because he has a bachelor and masters. Never mind that he isn't working in a related field or that he doesn't even have a house because his mortgage IS his student loans…only bankruptcy can't save you from that debt! Yea! COLLEGE DEGREES FOR EVERYONE…DEBT FOR EVERYONE!!!
Posted by LINDA WOMACK on November 6, 2011 at 2:21 pm | permalink |
To each his/her own. If you don't want to go to grad school, then don't. Choose a career that doesn't require it. But please don't berate other people who make the choice to further their education.
I have two master's degrees (not in science!), and each one has opened amazing doors for me. I'm of the opinion that education is never a waste of time or money. I worked full time while getting each degree, and I also took out loans and paid them back myself. It was worth it.
BTW, right now I work at a university in a department that doesn't "require" an advanced degree. But literally every person in my office has a master's degree or higher. I see it all the time in job ads these days, that someone with a graduate degree is "preferred."
Posted by Juli on September 1, 2011 at 11:50 am | permalink |
Very good web site. Many interesting pieces of news and remarks. Many thanks a whole lot for would enjoy to determine you compose more on this matter. i identified it quite appealing to study.
Posted by Super Affiliate Coaching Club on September 2, 2011 at 4:16 am | permalink |
I've seen a lot of commenters saying "but degree X is required for employment in field Y!" Even if that's true, that doesn't mean Penelope is wrong. For instance I have no idea why anyone gets a graduate degree in Social Work; it's probably true that it's required for a lot of jobs; it's also true that you probably won't make enough money to live comfortably while paying off the loans. That's not a justification for why it's rational to go to grad school, it's evidence that it's irrational to pursue a career in social work.
Which is not to say that all of life has to be rational. Plenty of people would question the wisdom of quitting a whole series of lucrative jobs to live on a farm in rural Wisconsin and homeschool kids. I'm mostly sympathetic to Penelope here because I'm tired of watching people get to the end of the grad-school moving walkway and stumble as they realize that posh professor job at the end was a mirage.
I say this all as someone who's got a graduate degree in a social science, and had to do some creative maneuvering at the end of it to turn it into a career. It's all working out fine for me, honestly, and I don't think I'd undo much of what I did; I'm actually back in school now, part-time, picking up some more technical skills for this new career, but I'm still making a real salary and have a retirement account. It definitely would have saved me a lot of aggro if I'd realized the odds of traditional academic success at the beginning, or if I'd had a better idea what other options I had and how to pursue them.
Posted by Erin McJ on September 2, 2011 at 10:35 am | permalink |
What I have noticed in conversations and in the comments on blogs like yours and "100 reasons NOT to go to grad school" is that people just getting started in grad school are the quickest to defend it, while those who have been in it for a while are much less enthusiastic (and often bitter) about their decision to go in the first place.
Posted by WG on September 2, 2011 at 1:06 pm | permalink |
Try patent law, or maybe computer programming.
Posted by BEH on September 4, 2011 at 1:49 pm | permalink |
Bull! Sounds like we got a whiner here! After 30 years in executive management, I can state that if an employer has the choice between a freshly minted BS with work history and a freshly minted Master's with work history, it's a no brainer; the Masters every time. Period. It is the only verifiable method at this time to remotely certify KNOWLEGE COMPETENCY, other than testing. And in today's market (and for the foreseeable future), 9% unemployment and an undereducated workforce, plus a Masters willing work for what a BS made and be glad for it, you can stop with the whining that grad school will not pay! POPPYCOCK!
Come on folks! It's the 2nd decade of the 21st century! KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, BRAINPOWER SELLS.
Posted by Brad Wats on September 2, 2011 at 6:23 pm | permalink |
I learned more in four months at my first job as an engineer than I did in the previous four years of school. My co-workers were much brighter than my most of my professors and more interested in sharing knowledge. And I got paid for it.
The best teachers I had in college were the people who worked as engineers during the day and taught a class at night. The worst were people who stayed in the university environment their entire lives.
Posted by Anonymous on September 5, 2011 at 11:06 pm | permalink |
I learned more in four months at my first job as an engineer than I did in the previous four years of school. My co-workers were much brighter than my most of my professors and more interested in sharing knowledge. And I got paid for it.
The best teachers I had in college were the people who worked as engineers during the day and taught a class at night. The worst were people who stayed in the university environment their entire lives.
Posted by Anonymous on September 5, 2011 at 11:06 pm | permalink |
I would say this is pretty much true for science degrees as well. I got a phd in physics because I wanted to do science for a living. I discovered that
a. there are no teaching jobs
b. the US doesn't really do science anymore (and I don't want to move to China or India)
c. my degree has made it really hard for me to get a job doing anything else.
Posted by Will on September 2, 2011 at 6:30 pm | permalink |
It's hard to believe that you cannot find any work with a PhD in Economics. One thing is for certain though: the longer it takes you to get a job, the harder it will be for you to get one. Not just because of your own failing confidence and emotional state, but because of the perception by gatekeepers that you are unemployable for some reason.
If it were me, I'd jump at the chance to work in China or India. There they would probably treat you like you walk on water, and you would most likely be able to live like a king. And then, when and if you get sick of living overseas, you can come back home with some real job credentials and the added value of experience working in another culture, either of which are going to play major roles in the global economy.
I don't care what the degree is in, if you aren't willing to go where you are needed, you will be cutting your career prospects down significantly. If you were an agricultural economist and you insisted on living in New York or Boston, you'd be missing a chance to really be somebody where your talents are not only understood, but appreciated: where ever there are a lot of farms. I don't think your job search problem is with your degree, I think your job search problem is with your emotions.
Posted by Steve C on September 3, 2011 at 1:04 am | permalink |
Physics != economics. I'm not sure your reply was aimed at me?
I'd also suggest that relocating to China (without one's family because China's residency visas are very hard to get) to take a low salary position is not likely to be the career booster you claim.
Posted by Will on September 3, 2011 at 10:56 am | permalink |
@ Will. My bad. I was referring to your post but was thinking about another situation and didn't refer back to your original post. I also got the impression that you had an opportunity to work in China or India and did not want to do that. I don't like the commenting format on this site because the reply window is not directly attached to the original comment window. Still, no excuses. I was sloppy.
Having said that, I don't get the same buzz over at PhD in Physics as I do over Economics, with respect to your post, at least not in India, but I still find it hard to believe that a PhD in Physics is not highly valued in many different industries.
I still think it is better to take something in the field rather than get bogged down in a job search indefinitely. In my opinion it is always better to have a job when searching for a new one, than it is to be unemployed while doing it. Being out of work carries a stigma to it that is hard to work around. We can't always control that, of course, but I think most people would agree with what I'm saying. The visa thing is problematic of course, as most countries prefer to keep their own citizens employed before they look elsewhere for workers. Wish it was the case here in this country, but here profit is king, everything else is secondary.
Good luck with your search!
Posted by Steve C on September 3, 2011 at 1:25 pm | permalink |
Try patent law, or maybe computer programming.
(Sorry – not used to commenting here).
Posted by BEH on September 4, 2011 at 1:50 pm | permalink |
I think your post makes sense for the type of people who read your blog, those who are motivated and genuinely focused on ongoing career development, but I think you are failing to identify what I think is the #1 most important reason to go to grad school – to build confidence in yourself. The reality is that an undergraduate degree is (for the large part of the population) nothing more than an extended version of high school with more freedom and the ability to pick a "major". However, the reality is that you are at this point not qualified to do much of anything and you don't have the experience or maturity to make any kind of meaningful contribution within a company – and you definitely dont have the funds to start something yourself, so you are stuck – this is the primary driver of the quarterlife crisis – the feeling of wanting to be able to start down a career path but having no idea what you want to do, what you can do, or what your capable of.
Going straight into work is necessary but very frustrating given that many people who are working today in their 30s and 40s are overwhelmed with their marriages and their kids and either hate their jobs or are completely bored by them and could care less about advancing….this is the stark reality that hits most 20 year olds when they hit the workforce and these people are typically overqualified but considerably under enthusiastic about work. This can have very negative impacts on young people just out of university.
I think graduate school can sometimes be necessary to kick start and really provide the career focus that at one time going to college did – it guarantees that you will be surrounded by other intelligent people presumably interested in the same things you are, it will give you a chance to really evaluate yourself against your peers and know what your capable of, it gives you time to mature and explore things with the optimism that naturally comes with being in school, as opposed to the overwhelming pessimism that can be found in many companies, and finally should open doors to you at a younger age for positions in companies where they give you more trust, more responsability, and greater expectations, all things that will help drive your career forward and help you avoid getting stuck in a job that you started in your 20s and now has you on some kind of long, slow career path to middle management. Unfortunately, this is the reality for most people who go straight into work (who aren't fundamentally career motivated like many of the readers of this blog).
Having said all of that, the cost issue is a major concern and I have trouble justifying all of the above when looking at taking on significant debt (sometimes additional debt to undergrad), but this is where I think you have to plan ahead – I think the number one motivation for doing well in undergraduate is purely to open doors for you at the graduate level and more importantly to try and get money at the graduate level – doing well in undergrad means almost nothing in the workforce, but it can mean thousands when it comes to graduate school (maybe not at the elite schools, but certainly in the lower tier 1 or higher tier 2 schools). For me, I did exceedingly well in undergraduate school which translated into the most average job afterwards – I did that job for two years and found my motivation, my confidence, and general enthusiasm for work starting to fade….just starting the graduate school exploration process started giving me that jolt that I needed and the resulting two years (got a very generous scholarship at a very average graduate school) provided me with two critical years where I matured (it was between 24 and 26) considerably, made great friends, met great professors (I never even bothered to get to know my professors in undergraduate as it felt more like a 4 year party than anything else), and realized through the experience that I was as good as my peers, that I could handle some very complicated business concepts (I went for an MBA), and that I deserved and could handle a low level manager position in a major company at the age of 26….I would never have had that kind of confidence had I not gotten my MBA….and spending two years reading business cases and discussing them with 30 or 40 other people your age, with different backgrounds, and debating them and writing about them, is a whole lot better than sitting in a cubicle, surfing the internet, and feeling your soul slide away…
For me, the two years was pracitically break even financially – I took some small loans to live off of, but had most of my tuition and expenses covered by the school through a combination of financial aid and scholarships – I could have gone to a top MBA school with my undergraduate grades and had many sleepless nights debating this topic, but looking back, having had success in my career and with manageable undergraduate and graduate loans (less than $30K combined) I think my path was a good (and conservative) one. There are still days I wonder if I would be some kind of uber-success had I simply gone to the best school I could have gotten into (maybe a top ten MBA) – with maybe $100K in loans, but potentially making so much money that I could pay it back with ease, but alas, I'll never know and I never would have had the stomach to take on that kind of debt.
In any case, I think your points are valid for certain types of extremely self motivated people, but for those of us who are career orientated, but don't necessarily have the confidence coming out of undergraduate, a few years in graduate school (at the right price) can be the perfect thing in your mid 20s to get you on the right track.
Posted by Ace on September 3, 2011 at 11:53 am | permalink |
I have two comments.
First, I think Penelope is spot on for most people. My son is currently a college junior and I plan to discuss this and the follow up article with him tonight. And I have a good angle to view this entire problem: I am a retired professor of education leadership and this column is smack dab in the middle of my field of research.
Second, I went to grad school — twice. Once for a Ph.D. in philosophy, and then again, fifteen years later, for an Ed.D. in organizational studies. The philosophy Ph.D. was incredibly valuable for me. I lusted after philosophical understanding since age 16, knew I would go on to study philosophy seriously before I entered college, choose an undergrad university based on its philosophy program, and stayed there with the same hand-chosen professors through to my doctorate. I can't say it "made me what I am" as I obviously was already that by age 16. But it helped me build an incredible skill base, not only in philosophy but in critical thinking and writing. It also prepared me for the real world of the philosophy professor: publishing books and scholarly articles, inventing and managing major conferences and grant-funded projects, etc. I didn't learn these things in grad school but I learned what I needed to position myself to learn these things on the job.
When I left the philosophy business I became an events manager full time for a while (while working in a different university) and then earned money for my research in the grants economy. I was hugely successful, and I have to credit my philosophy grad school for the skills that made that possible.
OK. So isn't there a contradiction here? Not at all. In 1964 when I entered grad school US universities were expanding and every newly minted PHD got one or more acceptable job offers. In 1966 when I passed doctoral prelioms I was getting amazing offers from top universities without even applying for jobs they were offering. A Ph.D.in any field in 1968 was a great meal ticket. Today it is economically worthless.
How about that kid who just lusts for philosophical understanding? That kid should definitely go to grad school or find suitable teachers elsewhere — or form an on-line personal learning network and study philosophy with them e.g., through MIT Open Course Ware courses. The combination of learning what you love and doing it through your own initiative will be unbeatable. Not following your dream marks you as a loser in your own eyes, and nothing could be worse for your spiritual or economic development.
Posted by leonard waks on September 3, 2011 at 1:56 pm | permalink |
I went into a graduate program because I wanted to be immersed in a topic I'm really passionate about… and I figured it was going to be sort of like a vacation with interesting homework. I ended up doing my thesis on a topic that pulled me into work that I was even more passionate about. I got to use most of the subsidized loan money to travel, eat well, and pay myself while I wrote a book proposal that was just picked up (with an advance!). So, I figure I spend about $2000/month when I'm on vacation so over two years I saved money!
Posted by Virginia on September 3, 2011 at 10:20 pm | permalink |
Spot on! Observations from a retired teacher:
Most teachers (K-12) have a useless Masters degree from a diploma mill.
All undergraduate and graduate degrees that end with "Studies" (Women Studies, Hispanic Studies, African American Studies, etc.)are usless exercises in victimhood and altruism run amuck.
The intellectual slum of a university is the school of education.
Posted by Lovro Dvcic on September 4, 2011 at 12:43 pm | permalink |
Lovro. I don't know if I would use such harsh terminology, but the schools of education are definitely cash cows for colleges and universities.
Posted by Steve C on September 5, 2011 at 7:19 pm | permalink |
Excellent points, and anyone thinking for a moment about law school should click through to your comments on that.
But the problems with graduate school are but symptoms of a deeper structural problem with our educational system generally.
Posted by Stuart Dean on September 4, 2011 at 12:52 pm | permalink |
I am a self-employed writer/consultant. There's no way I would be doing what I do, and charging what I charge, if I hadn't gone for a Ph.D. in the humanities (philosophy). I had slogged it out as a journalist for some years, mainly editorial writing, and felt an increasing desire to learn to think more deeply and creatively into the variety of topics that journalism put in my way.
After earning my degree at one of the Ivies, I returned to journalism. Three years later someone at a large Washington DC think tank phoned out of the blue and asked if I'd like to apply for a job as a senior writer. I got that job and, two years later, reduced my employment to part-time status (two days a week) so I could freelance. Five years later I went solo and have been entirely self-employed for the last seven years. I make a comfortable living by working substantially less than half-time, and the present miserable economy hasn't made a dent in my income.
Total tuition I paid for the doctorate: $5,000 — and that was only because a faculty member mistakenly gave someone else an assistantship one semester that should have gone to me. The rest was paid by scholarships and fellowships.
As a bonus, the stint in grad school forced me to take a variety of part-time jobs to pay my rent and other living expenses. These brought valuable experiences. For instance, a low-wage job working with mentally retarded adults taught me to think about how people with such limitations could be helped to live more productive and fulfilling lives. Clinical work in the intensive treatment unit of a private psychiatric hospital opened whole new worlds of insight into human frailties and the challenges of coping with them. I also taught more than 20 courses at half a dozen colleges, which taught *me* more than I can go into here. I would never have branched out into such fields had I not returned to grad school.
I agree with all the caveats, and I suspect that in the majority of cases, people could invest their time, money, and effort more profitably in other ways. But in some cases, and mine is certainly one of them, grinding through a doctoral program can yield enormous rewards. "Look before you leap" is good advice. Just remember that deciding for grad school and deciding against it are both leaps.
Posted by David on September 4, 2011 at 12:54 pm | permalink |
I really don't look back fondly on my academic career even though I did teach on the college level and left voluntarily, heck I don't even like academia and see alot of waste in graduate degrees, BUT, I transitioned into a field where I make three times as much as I would have otherwise without the degree/Ph.D. Entry level, the post is right, but when you want to get ahead and move into specialized fields why do so many people already employed want graduate degrees? Go into debt big time to get a degree is not smart. But neither is thinking that only work experience will get you ahead of the pack. So I posted cause I wonder where all the hostility comes from on this post–did the author get tossed from a graduate program, or does she just want to make herself feel superior to anyone with a degree–funny I don't feel superior as a person cause of any degree–why would you? Whatever the case, the post is so biased it's idiotic to package it is well meaning advice cause it doesn't reflect much real world experince–reader beware–in the end you need to do what you feel is right and appropriate for you–especially with all the ignoramus comments swirling around you.
Posted by craig duke on September 4, 2011 at 12:57 pm | permalink |
I'm a #7 too. I did an MBA overseas and had a blast.
It's a great excuse to goof off without damaging your resume.
Posted by W.C. Varones on September 4, 2011 at 1:05 pm | permalink |
As someone who's a small business owner that takes home close to $300k a year, my first instinct of those with masters degrees is that they are usually some sort of trust funder or someone who simply doesn't want to face the hardships of the real world. My first instinct if they were to apply would be not to hire because they aren't hungry.
I also lump these same people to those that go to small, expensive liberal arts college (and I'm not talking about ivy league colleges here).
What's encouraging is the real world is starting to catch up with the con that is higher education.
Posted by BradleyC on September 4, 2011 at 1:29 pm | permalink |
Bradley. As a small business owner, you get to make a lot of rules that other organizations can't make. That's fine, as long as you don't violate the law of the land. It's your right as a small business owner. Employees of your firm should not assume that they have that right though, unless you specifically tell them that that is what you want.
Not that you care, but what your comments tell me is that you probably aren't going to evolve from small business owner to large business owner. It's a pretty narrow minded perspective, not unlike the HR person who made a similar comment early on in the comments section.
Posted by Steve C on September 6, 2011 at 4:44 am | permalink |
I did a Master's degree while working, going at night and both days every other weekend. I paid out of pocket, and oftentimes was late to class coming from work – but understood. The job literally got me promoted immediately; then after I retired from my first profession I was hired several times in different jobs/professions before I settled on the Dept of State where a Master's (or more) is the norm.
Posted by ELM on September 4, 2011 at 1:33 pm | permalink |
This article has some good points regarding why you shouldn't go to grad school…right after undergrad. Or without seriously considering the costs and benefits. But the reality is, not everyone is business-oriented, not everyone has the capital and connections to start a business, and not everyone is going to be able to earn a living wage every waking moment of their life, no matter how well they plan. There are just too many educated people, too many people trying to start businesses, too many blogs, and too much competition in general to go by the bootstraps model of success anymore. There are no more "meal tickets" and even the best resume, with "marketable" experience up the wazoo, does not guarantee success. On the flip side, things are changing and moving so fast that the role of expert is no longer what it used to be. I mean, no disrespect to Penelope, but we're living in a age where anyone can create a blog, build up a following, and tout their way as the right way, simply because that's what they chose and it worked out for them.
There is more to life than a job: if you are nothing but a **** job in this life, you are a failure.
There is no such thing as a 'useless' degree. I really wish people would stop saying this. There are only people who do not know how to look at what they've really learned and can see the value in that, rather than focusing on what the latest "hot jobs" article says are valuable skills.
There is no one right path.
I repeat: There is no one right path.
Say it with me now: There is no one right path.
Posted by Lee on September 4, 2011 at 1:44 pm | permalink |
When I was going to college, I would have much rather gotten my degree in Greek/Roman studies, but I went for the Computer Science degree because the trend was for that business to boom for the next 20 years. I was gainfully employed for 30 years instead until the recession. So my advice is to go into what will get you a job and for me it meant a move to FL for my first low paying opportunity.
Posted by BS61 on November 27, 2011 at 9:37 am | permalink |
Folks, this is not new. I wanted to be a college English instructor. But I left grad school in 1985 when I realized the job market contained numerous adjunct positions and few to no full-time positions…just like today. I went back to grad school when I could afford it: while working full-time at something else. And for the last 20 years, I've worked at other things while teaching part-time.
If you want a career that has a crappy employment outlook, pursue it ONLY IF you love it and can't live without it. But be prepared to do it only part-time.
Posted by Taxpayer on September 4, 2011 at 1:57 pm | permalink |
@Lee, I agree. There is no one true way! This post completely ignores those who have worked full time while obtaining advanced degrees. I do think there's a bubble, but it shouldn't be automatic to dismiss those who have gotten advanced degrees, either.
I worked full time while making slow progress on an MA that was directly applicable to my field, as well as participating in a two year internal leadership program. Both were highly encouraged by my employers (and by "encouraged", I mean "close to mandatory if you ever want a chance at promotion"). I just turned in my thesis, and they're already encouraging me to start another professional development program that focuses on organizational structure and interaction with other agencies. Once I wrap that up, I'll go back to self-study for language training, with limited support from my employers. At some point in the next five years, I'll probably get bored enough to start a PhD.
All of these programs cover different areas and are teaching me a wide variety of skill sets that are directly applicable to the job. It's my job as the employee to put all of those pieces/degrees together to be the best employee I can by expanding and maintaining a broad base of expertise.
I think people should simply should be selective. Go into the right programs, for the right reasons, with the intent of learning in order to have applicable knowledge that will help you become a better employee – in the future as well as the present – not just to obtain a degree.
One last thing – I was appalled when I arrived at college for my BA at how many people weren't there because they wanted to learn. Frankly, most of my college classes were far less difficult than my so-called "college prep" high school studies. I did a lot of self-study because I wanted the actual education, not merely a piece of paper that claimed I'd been educated. That suggests a cultural attitude shift is needed….and maybe we need to look at the past to see how much actual learning has been eroded.
Posted by Pickles on September 4, 2011 at 2:27 pm | permalink |
The only time I regretted not completing my masters in Electrical Engineering was when a friend wanted me to teach programming part time at a local college. Without a the degree they wouldn't consider me for the job.
I guess programming professionally for 25 years was not sufficient to teach freshmen.
Posted by John Davies on September 4, 2011 at 2:39 pm | permalink |
CNN just posted some statistics on this issue on a segment called The Education Effect. It's on right now. Interesting juxtaposition.
Posted by Steve C on September 4, 2011 at 2:46 pm | permalink |
Even the more modestly-read business professionals know that hiring is the voodoo of commerce, the most demanding of all forms of gambling. From the biographies of old man Firestone forward, the illusive art of hiring and the frustrations encountered are legend. Roll in the clown show of affirmative action and phrenology-based "diversity" and its a wonder any of our major institutions function given the superior culture of duplicity and disingenuousness that has taken over our modern institutions. The literature is full of histories involving Mass Psychogenic Illness and Collective Psychoses in institutional workplace settings. Many recoil at the murderous history of Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot, but they should contemplate that ordinary employees executed their policies, as soldier and as workers, and most of what they did was required by policy and institutionally considered to be a normal, necessary and rational act.
Though mortocracies provide extreme examples, what was the human cost of Aimee trashing resumes that were never read?
Hiring carries the slipperiest of trustee duty. Even the personal interview is an unstable filter and no reliable guarantor of eventual outcome. The resumes themselves are virtually worthless.
The job is the only filter. And it too is subject to fatal irony. The better the candidate and the more important the potential benefit from hiring the candidate, the greater the corruption and misuse of authority to deny the assets and talents of that person to the employing entity.
Those educated in Darwin know the issue was never evolution but instead natural selection. The surviving rubric of hiring institutions are themselves being selected-for by how they hire and fire.
In upper executive circles, the initials "H. R." are satirically noted as standing for "Human Racketeering". The racket is preserving the mediocrity and security that pleases the established middle dominate the work culture, while creating pretensions of policy and procedure that create evidence (however hollow) that an earnest effort is being made to identify and hire the next wave of organizational thoroughbreds and transformationally talented personalities.
And what is diversity, really. Is it ten phrenologically-filtered and Hegelian adjudged Black, Brown, Mulatto, Yellow and White paired equally in male and female derivative form? Or, is diversity ten people from Gas City, Pueblo, Hawthorne, Hoxie, Guyman, Mina, Brooklyn, Alameda and Gu-inn?
Diversity should be about the optimal distribution of talent that prospers the hiring organization and cause the workplace to also serve as a positively transformative life experience for those who work there.
Hiring is expermentalism in its most demanding form. It is not something to be left to the cowardly, the provincial or the ignorant. How interesting that the bigger the corporation (for profit or not) the less this is the case.
Something is being selected-for. In human history, democidal government and mortacracy is the norm. Our Constitution is the exception.
Those hiring should sit with their team and re-read the DoI and discuss it before ramping up the next round of candidate reviews. There is a constitutionally-protected life embodied in each of those submissions. Mutual decency requires no less of them, and they and their organization will be the better for it.
Posted by willem on September 4, 2011 at 3:56 pm | permalink |
The attitude of this article toward education is very worrisome to this constitutional conservative. Counseling on the practicalities of life is one thing, but to attack and ridicule liberal education is quite another. This is especially the case since there is no mutual exclusivity inherent in this improperly alleged dichotomy. On the level of philosophic propriety, what appears to be the grand assumption here is that self government in this great country of ours can continue with a citizenry whose education is tethered exclusively to its "marketability" for the work place. If we take this view seriously, an education for liberty, nay the greatest things said and done, must rise and fall by how effectively such things allow one to "fit into" the career market. That is, fit in as a productive cog in the great machine. The author's flippancy aside, we are commanded to "Know thine place" in a distributive system that spews products to fulfill a commodious life of pleasantries the purpose of which we know not what. This, ladies and gentleman, is "value" defined economically. Why not commit the great books of the western literary tradition to the fire in favor of the latest version of Ipad 2.0 for dummies. What fun!! What you may not do, what is a violation of the employee tested practice and reason, is any advanced study in non-technical PhDs. Such temerity will lead to a life short nasty and brutish. Dare not, they say, slip the sully bonds of earth and chance to touch the face of God, when landing the "district supervisor" position is so much more reasonable. Deep study of the "good, wise and the just" are not favored on resumes, a mark of lassitude don't you know. Agnosticism regarding abiding issues is encouraged, no no no, rather celebrated by this author. You too, with practice, can mute your natural strivings for distant worlds; the quixotic experience of transcendence that takes hold when exposed by great books that are at once beguiling as they are maddening. The comfortable life of Hobbsian commodious living is the stuff of a life well lived.
Regarding the relevancy of a nontechnical education, the horizons of our liberal social order must be defended not by the laughingly naïve practicalities of current marketable skill sets advanced by this author. The very capitalist system under whose sway the author pens her gibberish must be justified as a genuine moral order when questioned. Such defense requires a fashioning of arguments from philosophic suppositions that inspire and define. Our enemies state that deviance from theocratic cannons warrants death!!! What conservatism, as a proxy for the west, needs more than anything in this day and age is its supporters to undertake an emersion into and renewal of western traditions. After all, by what touchstones do we guide national, state and local policy? What principles inform law? What is justice? You'll not find these answers in "career" manuals. Such dribble, along with the author's silly bromides, assumes the most important issues of "life" are settled. They are not, to wit: Why national health care is wrong is not something addressed in the moral vacuum of that withered space deemed, "the intersection between work and life"â¦Plato's cave in 12 easy steps.
The author's opinions go too far in the direction of know-nothing barbarism. Self evident principles on the realities of satisfying the practical necessities of life must never be expanded to obscure life's purpose. She has struck a profound imbalance and distortion in the suggested approach to a life well lived. Socrates was said to be penniless, yet the happiest man on earth. And, I may add, my savior came to me in rags. As a purveyor of the empty philosophy of lemmings, please teach me: What is worth dying for? Our enemies know, what does your penchant for resume building offer? Will a PhD in engineering, physics, nanotechnology provide the answer? Of what possible relevance are admonitions in favor of careerism offer to a man who believes it is easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle, than for a rich man to go to heaven? What is it that you believe being conservative is? What is your criterion of relevance?
We may thank God that the founders of this great country understood the value of liberal education even if its immediate utilization and value is not measured by the impression it makes on a prospective employer. Let's be clear, it is not to empirical science, or wondrous technologies, that these men turned to justify the constitutional order. It was to the teaching and admonitions of history, philosophy, poetry and yes even law.
Posted by edward Rueda on September 4, 2011 at 4:43 pm | permalink |
What an excellent thread.
At the root of this issue lies the failed and parasitic bureaucracy of accreditation. The entire paradigm of university accreditation is a raging farce. It is not a quality system. It seems to be little better than a protection racket to monopolize and balance competitive pressures between the respective universities.
We need to liberate students and faculty from the entire false economy of "diploma" and focus instead on classwork and a socratic professorate. Diplomas do not in themselves demonstrate competency, much less mastery. But today, students may have to purchase and endure 20 credit hours of rote fluff to get 8 hours of what they are most anxious to learn.
If they ever knew, most have forgotten our "higher ed" culture is mostly the product Peabody Coal's desire for obedient workers to replace those damn Americans that didn't know their place. He leveraged a virtual buy-out of the Prussian education system and had the pedagogy and many of its technicians transported from the Prussian Empire to the east coast of the United States in the latter 19th Century.
The superior culture of today's higher ed institutions remain shamefully obsolete, largely because of these imported and now cardinal paradigms. The administrations continue to this day to practice derivatives of discredited Hegelian supremacism with all its utopian affects and condescension.
Why should this matter? The fatal conceit of the Hegelian and Victorian era are the intellectual birthplace of eugenics, phrenology, mass sterilization policy, "the one drop" rule and the segregationist constructs of racial purity, racial impurity, human breeding experiments and the Jim Crow legislation championed by British interests who controlled the monopoly on cotton exports from the southern plantations many of which themselves were bankrolled into consolidation by same British financiers that facilitated underwriting the formation of Confederacy that resulted in the Civil War.
This entire notion of "the master race" was a normal and broadly accepted Hegelian belief; it's highest mission; a dominating principle truth anchoring early 20th Century European thought. Thus, it was also thought championed by the majority of the university intellectuals of the era.
This was the same utopian movement that spoke of "progressive man perfected under socialism" — compulsory improvement by scientific means operated by experts for the greater good. In this original context "socialism" was a term that meant "scientific government". It's counterpart was "phrenology" which was the scientific prioritization of human intelligence, ability and breeding so mankind could be scientifically governed in the most efficient manner possible.
Laugh as you must, but this lofty idiocy comprises the philosophical rooting of today's American Higher Ed. A kinder and gentler version of these same cardinal operating premise dominates the superior culture of the American K-12 public education system today. How ironic that after the victories of the American Civil Rights movement, the operating premises of phrenology would rise from the dead and provide the 'academically blessed' framework of affirmative action and the intellectual premise of "diversity" studies.
For more on this look to Karl Popper and the work of the Mont Pelerin Society formed in the late 1940s, by scholars alarmed with the rise and acceptance of "scientism" which was displacing the scientific method, intellectual rigor and classical scholarship with the false memes of dialectics and reductionism — the underlying methodology used in part by @Aimee to segregate the employment applications in what they presumed was a responsible, scientific and logical way.
I know. OT. Mostly. But damn, people. It's time to shake-off the europhile academic non-sense and re-develop some "honesty competency" and champion more tolerance for free and faithful critical expression.
If there's one new academic discipline I would like to see some free thinking university champion, it's "Institutional Pathology."
If we can't better learn to heal our institutions, our society will certainly perish in the sepsis. Is this not the greater problem that confronts our economic interests today?
Posted by willem on September 4, 2011 at 5:02 pm | permalink |
@Reueda
You need to realize that Hegel constructed the apologia, repudiation and rationalization for NOT adopting the values and system of governance put in place by our nations founders.
The problem is not "liberal education" but the emergent absence of classical liberalism in the modern American university and the student product.
E Pluribus Unum has been hijacked by rogue narcissism fueled by the hubris of Hegel Uber Alles.
We are a nation founded in mutualism, not pluralism; a hysteresis of mutualism where your rights end where mine begin and vice versa, preserved in continuum by equal protection under the law.
Amidst the magnificent accomplishments of technology and the classical sciences, we ironically live in an administrative era of bureaucratic scientism and selective enforcement — the opposite of equal protection under the law.
Yet more evidence of the Hegelian corruption predicted by Karl Popper and his scholarly cohorts.
Lose the conservative/liberal dichotomy. It's a false meme.
Either each individual enjoys primacy in a hysteresis of mutualism preserved by equal protection under the law, or its just the same old authoritarian tyranny.
Posted by willem on September 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm | permalink |
#4–The bit about very few jobs available to non-science degrees is not entirely correct. Most jobs in accounting (a gigantic field with many jobs) beyond the most basic introductory positions requires a degree in usually either accounting or finance. People with a Masters in Taxation are always in high demand.
Still, your broader point is absolutely true–useful college degrees are mostly in difficult subjects.
Posted by Matt on September 4, 2011 at 6:04 pm | permalink |
It's cheaper to buy a field and go stand in it — and about as useful.
Posted by McGehee on September 4, 2011 at 6:28 pm | permalink |
This would be true at the undergraduate level as well, were it not for Griggs vs Duke Power. The Marine Corps put poor, smart but undermotivated me into IT, without a degree. It's led to a career of full employment for the past 35 years. I did finish my degree when the company I worked for was acquired by another which emphasized degrees beyond all reason. The government paid, it only cost me some time.
My youngest is pursuing her (fully funded) PhD in a scientific field. She wants to do research in the industry, and the degree is teaching her her craft, and getting her contacts in the industry. I'm fairly optimistic, her peers are still getting hired at very decent salaries.
Posted by MarkD on September 4, 2011 at 6:44 pm | permalink |
5. I'm planning on teaching. Forget it. There are no teaching jobs.
Unless you have a science degree. My daughter got a teaching job (in Seattle!) with no teaching degree or even a single teaching course in college. She has a degree in biology. It is private school (public schools require teaching credentials – whatever those are) that specializes in teaching the kids the public schools have cast out because they are "unteachable". Sharp kid. No experience. Tough job. The gave her a raise and a promotion after one year because she can do what apparently grad school teachers can't. I guess I make your point.
Posted by Boyd on September 4, 2011 at 6:44 pm | permalink |
I am a recent graduate. Got a BA in Government and International Politics in George Mason University this spring.
I am thinking about Graduate school. And I'd love to get an MA in Political Science.
But I'm not. I'm looking for a job, so I can have something solid for the next few years as I attempt and re-attempt the Foreign Service Exam.
If there are anything my college professors have told me, these professors didn't get their MA's right after getting their Bachelors. They worked in their respective fields for years before Uncle Sam told em that to advance further, they need MAs, and they'll get some extra money to help achieve that.
One of them was my old ROTC Instructor. He went to college and got his bars there, worked his way up to Major, and now he's got practical real world experience he applies to his classes when attempting his MA in Political Science.
As I've told my family and friends. "I'd rather have years of experience under my belt, so when I get an MA, I have the real world creds to back it up when I go back to job hunting."
Posted by Jusuchin (Military Otaku) on September 4, 2011 at 7:10 pm | permalink |
Re: "So, for those of us who agree with your points but realized them too late, how do you go about *fixing* your career after getting a master's in the humanities?"
Indeed, that is a very good question. Adults, teachers and everyone else you can name in my teenaged past insisted that college was the path to a successful life, sterling career, etc. Then, once I was there – more folks told me that graduate school was the path to the top. Now that I have two graduate degrees, they tell me that its all been for nothing, and that a graduate degree makes you less employable! Well, that's just peachy keen folks… any other surprises? I wish I'd joined the Marines instead…and that ain't no lie.
Sarcasm aside, the problem is that colleges, universities and similar programs have been allowed to assume a gatekeeper function for many careers – you can't get from here to there without first passing through the local diploma mill. Want to change careers? Do not pass go, back through the diploma mill again; sorry old chum, but you don't have the requisite pieces of paper attesting to your qualifications.
Many in higher education justify the enormous costs of post-secondary education by noting that college is to "learn how to live," not train for a career. That excuse might have held water when a college education could be had for a modest amount of money (thirty or more years ago), but not now.
Posted by Georgiaboy61 on September 5, 2011 at 12:06 am | permalink |
I know the writer specifically excluded science degrees from analysis, but since my graduate degree has an s in it (MSEE) its the only point of reference i have.
an MS has more challenge and more meat to it than a BS. You learn more. some people like to learn things and the world needs people to learn and do new things. no matter how smae old same old my job is it is still a little bit different each time i do it.
Posted by john on September 5, 2011 at 12:29 am | permalink |
I found my MSEE classes much easier than my BSEE classes. For my undergrad classes I had to take a wide variety of classes in all aspects of Electrical Engineering. For my masters classes, I took the classes that interested me and were in my sub-specialty.
Posted by Anonymous on September 5, 2011 at 6:31 pm | permalink |
I found my MSEE classes much easier than my BSEE classes. For my undergrad classes I had to take a wide variety of classes in all aspects of Electrical Engineering. For my masters classes, I took the classes that interested me and were in my sub-specialty.
Posted by Anonymous on September 5, 2011 at 6:31 pm | permalink |
Love our blog and there are certainly some though provoking topics.
Just one point. I think it is very simplistic to say we are all entrepreneurs. Some people may do well with their own business and others may not! Some people may actually be in careers where you do need a masters… whether in the humanities or not. For instance in International Development, for most people to even get a foot in the door you do need some sort of post-grad degree. And if you want to realistically get into the UN, the majority of people need a masters. Yes a few can work out a way through without putting in the graduate work, but not many.
In fact in all fields, it is people who are the exception who are able to get by without a formal education. For those people, grad school may be a waist. For others, who may enjoy school or who may have simply done the cost/benefit analysis, Grad school is a viable and wonderful option. I am actually in awe of people who can balance continuing education and work.
Leslie
Posted by Leslie on September 5, 2011 at 1:36 am | permalink |
I guess those are all true – but in my line of work, Molecular Biology, you will never, ever, ever go above a certain level without a Ph.D. Isn't going to happen, no way, no how.
Posted by Hugo Schmidt on September 5, 2011 at 3:32 am | permalink |
I love the pigs:-)
Posted by Mutimba Mazwi on September 5, 2011 at 4:12 am | permalink |
Worst of all, the things that these people learn in graduate school are largely untrue.
The humanities have been destroyed by Marxists who succeeded in overrunning and corrupting these fields a generation ago. A graduate degree in one of these fields actually makes a person less knowledgeable than if they had never attended school in the first place. They actually know and understand less than when they got there because so much of what they have learned is untrue. Worse yet, these untruths are not random in nature, but part of a programmed attack on liberal democracy itself. To pursue a degree in these fields is to make oneself a tool of Marxist radicals. There are worse paths in life to choose, but most of them involve sticking needles in your arm, being incarcerated in prison, or committed to an institution.
I personally know intelligent people whose indoctrination by leftist radicals posing as university professors has made the net value of their life a negative number.
If someone were to show up looking for a job with a graduate degree in gender studies, or one of the other imaginary disciplines that have been invented in recent years to give the patina of legitimacy to malignant nonsense, I would not hire them because you can't trust a crazy person.
Posted by Lee Reynolds on September 5, 2011 at 4:50 am | permalink |
They should replace humanities college course listings with "useless course – won't mean much more than warm spit in the real world."
If you want to function in today's society, you have to do three things: know how to create something the world needs, or will be better off from; more than a passing knowledge and usage of computers, and work towards expunging liberals from positions of power and influence EVERYWHERE. That's the real definition of a USEFUL adult.
Oh: one more thing … learn how to VOTE PROPERLY, and find out WHO it is you're voting for, for cripes' sake! If enough idiots vote for a Barack Obama again, then we're all truly screwed (again).
Posted by Anonymous on September 6, 2011 at 11:11 am | permalink |
Everything you said was completely up to "…expunging liberals from positions of ….et all" was agreeable, but then I started laughing.
Posted by Pat McCrotch on September 30, 2011 at 4:19 pm | permalink |
all of #7 is valid. I met far too many people in college with that mantra and then no explanation as to how they were going to pay back the massive debt working at that fulfilling job as a social worker or "green activist". Totally out of touch with reality. I went through college and have a degree in Biology but couldn't find a job and have driven a truck for the last 20 yrs. I make about $60K. Not rich but a decent living and I didn't need college to do it.
Posted by JonP on September 5, 2011 at 6:32 am | permalink |
and by the way, I had 3 companies cold-call me this week offering me a job driving for them. Not bad in this economy.
Posted by JonP on September 5, 2011 at 6:34 am | permalink |
Most of this I agree with. The only reason to get a phd in the humanities is to try to get a job teaching in the humanities. that is the only reason whatsoever to do it. if one wants self improvement or knowledge for the sake of knowledge, that's what great book's programs as a second major are for. I do take issue with #5, however. Teaching jobs aren't impossible, there are just very few, and some disciplines are worse than others. It all depends on where one's degree came from. so if you get into a good graduate school, you have a chance, otherwise, you will spend yourl ife adjuncting if you're lucky.
Posted by Lacrymae on September 6, 2011 at 12:55 am | permalink |
Most of this I agree with. The only reason to get a phd in the humanities is to try to get a job teaching in the humanities. that is the only reason whatsoever to do it. if one wants self improvement or knowledge for the sake of knowledge, that's what great book's programs as a second major are for. I do take issue with #5, however. Teaching jobs aren't impossible, there are just very few, and some disciplines are worse than others. It all depends on where one's degree came from. so if you get into a good graduate school, you have a chance, otherwise, you will spend yourl ife adjuncting if you're lucky.
Posted by Lacrymae on September 6, 2011 at 12:55 am | permalink |
What if you attend grad school while you work? I agree with you on several of these issues, but I disagree at the direction with which you took the argument. A grad school degree is VERY useful and I still look for them when hiring. As my father once (very logically) said "you go to college to get an education, you go to grad school to get a job". Grad school is designed to help focus attention, gain insight in a more minute area that can help you think logically and decisively about things.
Much of what we learn in the business world has little to do with business, and more to do with conforming to the current trends and thoughts in our industry or company. Firms today care less about good or new ideas and more about "who is on board?" I know – I've lived through this time and again. "It's not just good enough to have everyone on the bus – they all have to agree with the direction the driver is going!" is the mantra.
I'm sorry – but that is wrong. While we should all work to achieve the GOAL the driver is trying to achieve, there is usually more than one way to reach that goal and it's important to find as many ways there as possible. People who have grown up in corporate America are poorly prepared for this. ANY dissent is a sign of insubordination, or worse! Few companies value the "outside the box" thinker (though many say they seek them – they don't really).
I've attended one of the most LEFTIST schools in the nation, and I did it for one reason. I figured if I could go in there, learn from them (who I disagree with fundamentally on almost every issue) and succeed – then I would be even better at what I do. I believe I am right – I was the fly in the ointment to many of these professors. But I got the grades and learned a boatload about how to think differently and achieve things in a manner others never will. Sadly, these talents are not widely respected in the US.
Why? It has alot to do with some of the ideas you posted here. Many people who start a company foolishly believe that the ideas that started the company are the ones that will help it grow. Or they think it's all about them. Or they think it's about "the one thing" that made them successful. Or something like that. So they discount everything else. I can't tell you how many interviews I've been on and spoken to younger people with terribly closed minds. Those minds may have successfully started companies, but they have developed closed systems within those companies – and when you look at the failure rate of startups – I can point to one reason why many of them failed. Lack of proper preparation for the rigors of the market. Lack of openness to different approaches to running a business.
These are things you CAN get in grad school, but not so much in the business world. I'd argue your point is more about the student and what they seek to achieve by attending grad school, and less about JUST ATTENDING grad school. I make this point to my son (who is preparing to head to college) daily. What school he goes to is unimportant. What IS important is what he is going for, what he hopes to achieve while he is there, and how he prepares himself for the day he leaves.
In business….all most companies do is seek to make others in the image of management. Conform or die. And people wonder why so many companies are having problems?
Posted by Ronihan on September 6, 2011 at 1:47 pm | permalink |
Many great points . . . I had to chime in with a rant of mine over here (and yes, I linked to you). http://donotextthehiringmanager.blogspot.com/2011/09/on-waiting-it-out.html
Posted by Shimrit Paley on September 7, 2011 at 6:00 pm | permalink |
For me, graduate school and furthering my career weren't mutually exclusive: I just went to school full time and continued to work full time, after contemplating graduate school for a few years post-college and working in the meantime. It's important to research your field and what degrees will train you to excel in it – I consulted about half a dozen leaders in the industry vie informational interviews before applying and they all recommended a specific degree and a short list of schools. Now that I'm relocating to a new state for a higher quality of life, my graduate degree helped me rise to the top of the stack career-wise, making my transition to an extremely insular community and field a breeze. To each her own.
Posted by Themis Speaks on September 7, 2011 at 9:26 pm | permalink |
For me, graduate school and furthering my career weren't mutually exclusive: I just went to school full time and continued to work full time, after contemplating graduate school for a few years post-college and working in the meantime. It's important to research your field and what degrees will train you to excel in it – I consulted about half a dozen leaders in the industry vie informational interviews before applying and they all recommended a specific degree and a short list of schools. Now that I'm relocating to a new state for a higher quality of life, my graduate degree helped me rise to the top of the stack career-wise, making my transition to an extremely insular community and field a breeze. To each her own.
Posted by Themis Speaks on September 7, 2011 at 9:26 pm | permalink |
For me, graduate school and furthering my career weren't mutually exclusive: I just went to school full time and continued to work full time, after contemplating graduate school for a few years post-college and working in the meantime. It's important to research your field and what degrees will train you to excel in it – I consulted about half a dozen leaders in the industry vie informational interviews before applying and they all recommended a specific degree and a short list of schools. Now that I'm relocating to a new state for a higher quality of life, my graduate degree helped me rise to the top of the stack career-wise, making my transition to an extremely insular community and field a breeze. To each her own.
Posted by Themis Speaks on September 7, 2011 at 9:26 pm | permalink |
Bold and courageous in your truth telling you are! I'm all for education, but I'm for self-education along the lines of one's interests, purpose and service to others. I believe that you can get paid quite well and be of service to others by pursuing your passions-instead of pursuing what THEY say you should learn.
Posted by Chris on September 11, 2011 at 5:26 pm | permalink |
I started a business while earning my MBA, and I found it an extremely helpful combination. I was able to take what I learned in school — it was an evening program for working professionals, for what it's worth — and apply it to my business the next day if I wanted. I found it an extremely worthwhile combination, especially since I had no background in accounting and finance.
That being said, I agree with you that full-time MBA program is essentially a giant waste of money.
Posted by Gerald Hodges on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 pm | permalink |
The teaching comment is totally false. There are plenty of adjunct teaching positions out there, as well as a plethora of K-12 teaching positions in the South - except for maybe GA and SC. Also, there a myriad of staff and administrative positives at colleges and universities across the country.
Graduate school isn't for everyone and should be undertaken without a real understanding of what they want to do and how that degree will impact their career goals. That said, I will not tell people who have decided to go to graduate school not to. Just as I won't knock the personal choices you've made. We all have our own journeys to travel. And I don't find it liberating or fulfilling to criticize the journey's of others.
Posted by Deyamport Will on September 14, 2011 at 3:59 pm | permalink |
You forgot to mention why I went to grad school:
To live in another country.
Sure I could have just moved to another country, but I was 23 and had just graduated from a no-name state school. I had a perfect GPA and becuase of that, I got into a great graduate program at a top 25 university. This enabled me to live in the UK for one year as a student and then be given, just for graduating, a two year working visa. That enabled me to get a job, a really great job actually. Then I lived in the UK for three more years, traveling and working great jobs. I made amazing contacts and pushed myself to try out all sorts new things that are not available in the states becasue it is so spread out here. When I returned to America 6 months ago, yes I struggled to find a job, just like everyone else, but thanks to my resume, contacts, and references, I ended up with a fantastic job with a great CAREER path.
I loved grad school in Scotland. My classes themselves helped me to refine my work, but it was the experience of living in another country with people from all over the world coming together that taught me how to work with a wide group of people and how to be comfortable in really random situations. It taught me to advocate for myself and gave me the chances to take huge risks. And I also learned that I can bike 35 miles around a Loch in the rain. I don't regret spending $20,000 for that experience and I would happily do it again. And again. And again.
Posted by Danielle on September 14, 2011 at 5:45 pm | permalink |
OMG!!! Those are the cutest pigs ever. And they're beautiful at the same time. One reason I don't eat pork anymore (apologies to the Farmer).
Mercy, you certainly have brought the boyz out of the woodwork with this post. Will comment when I'm more awake.
Posted by LongTimeRez on September 15, 2011 at 3:27 am | permalink |
You should mention Thorstein Veblen in here somewhere. Graduate school is a form of conspicuous consumption, like a large yacht or big house (with lots of wood siding that has to be repainted every few years). It signals that you have lots of resources to waste. In that sense, the pointlessness of it is not a problem, but an essential feature.
Posted by David Cramer on September 20, 2011 at 1:07 pm | permalink |
HiI want to elevate my site www.medikalurunler.org original content that article I want to climb in and help, but I do not know exactlywhat to do olabilirmisiniz.thanks
Posted by Anonymous on September 26, 2011 at 11:10 pm | permalink |
HiI want to elevate my site www.medikalurunler.org original content that article I want to climb in and help, but I do not know exactlywhat to do olabilirmisiniz.thanks
Posted by Anonymous on September 26, 2011 at 11:10 pm | permalink |
So maybe it is the cynic in me, but it seems like the author was rejected by several graduate programs and rather than strike it out on her own, she resorted to that antiquated and distinctly American "pull yourself up by the boots straps" mentality, which most middle-class parents tattoo on the foreheads of their children, settling for writing scathing reviews of the institution that rejected her. Don't get me wrong, Ragged Dick was a great period piece chronicling the greed and avarice of Industrial America and what one had to endure to scratch out a meager existence much to the chagrin of the robber barons, but in a post-Industrial society you shouldn't have to grovel before your employer to make a fair, living wage and be treated decently. But hey what do I know……..I am in Graduate school……………….
Posted by Guest on September 28, 2011 at 7:04 pm | permalink |
As someone who just graduated with an MA, I can attest to the truth about a lot of this. I am trying to switch careers and every interviewer so far assumes that I only went because I couldn't cope with reality. So, working a job that pays less than before I went to college and trying to market myself wherever possible.
For anyone reading this and sceptical, feel free to drop me an email.
Posted by Michael on September 28, 2011 at 7:17 pm | permalink |
This article savors strongly of bitterness. I bet that you applied six or seven times to graduate school before giving up on it. Don't rain on the parade of others just because you couldn't cut it.
Posted by Rosie on October 1, 2011 at 2:05 am | permalink |
It sounds like the author has an envy-driven bitterness to those who went the extra mile or two in their education. These counterarguments are so subjective it's painful to read. I might suggest a Masters in English to make better points.
Posted by Morgan on October 31, 2011 at 11:15 am | permalink |
I have a graduate degree, and a tenured university job…and graduate school was the biggest mistake I've made in my life.
Posted by Jennm59 on October 31, 2011 at 1:50 pm | permalink |
Humanities are not for everyone, but they remain essential to a democratic society. Einstein said it best:
"It is not enough to teach a man a specialty. Through it he may become a kind of useful machine, but not a harmoniously developed personality. It is essential that the student acquire an understanding of and a lively feeling for values. He must acquire a vivid sense of the beautiful and of the morally good…..He must learn to understand the motives of human beings, their illusions and their sufferings, in order to acquire a proper relationship to individual fellow men and to the community. These precious things are conveyed to the younger generation through personal contact with those who teach, not–or at least not in the main–through text books. It is this that primarily constitutes and preserves culture. This is what I have in mind when I recommend the "humanities" as important, not just dry specialized knowledge in the fields of history and philosophy. Overemphasis on the competitive system and premature specialization on the ground of immediate usefulness kill the spirit on which all cultural life depends, specialized knowledge included."
Posted by Gretta on November 27, 2011 at 11:59 pm | permalink |
Hi penelope,
when you say "There are very very few jobs that require a non-science degree in order to get the job."
what if i want to become an art teacher but my bachelor degree was in english (literature)?
I've been out of undergrad for 2 years now and have some work experience art related in galleries and an art magazine but would these credentials on paper be enough for let's say an elementary/pre-school to even consider me for art teaching or even art teacher's assistant positions?
sidenote: i went to a well-known high school for fine arts for 4 years (currently still listed on my resume) but im sure people think who cares what you did in high school after a certain point right?
help : /
-extremely confused
Posted by extremely confused on January 4, 2012 at 9:59 am | permalink |
I couldn't agree more! The only thing I would add is all higher education should be more specific to a career field. It takes five years to get a four year degree and most of what you learn will not apply in the real world. It is a shame that most students that graduate from college come out with a lot of debt and few skills. Most don't even become employed in a field related to their degree. What a waste!
Posted by Ronnie Holt on January 15, 2012 at 9:23 pm | permalink |
"The problem is that what you do in school is not what you will do in a career. So if you love school, you'll probably hate the career it's preparing you for, since your career is not going to school."
I'm living this. Thanks P. Where were you 6 years ago? I'm starting my lost stage now and I'm 28.
I think I'll be leaving the grad school off my resume.
Posted by MKK on January 22, 2012 at 5:40 am | permalink |
i dont undertsand wat the convo's about i came here to check for ear defenders.
Posted by nameless on February 6, 2012 at 12:44 pm | permalink |