<p>LOL…when I read “versatile” I thought of Music Theatre majors. Most of the ones I know are in a variety of other fields now…their father’s business (or their own), restaurants (waiting tables or grill chef), temping, being nannies…</p>
<p>And re the lament that the “brightest” people go into finance–evidently not all of the brightest people were in finance recently. Some of them were sort of dumb. Or evil. Or both.</p>
<p>Nursing!
Not only is it great preparation for life (you learn about human development, physiology, effective communication, handling people in difficult circumstances, responding to a variety of emergency and non-emergency situations) but a BSN is also great preparation for graduate school in a number of fields. And, you will be marketable and you can’t be outsourced unless you want to be!</p>
<p>Just a question, how versatile do you guys think a math major with a minor in something else would be? Maybe not directly out of college, but for grad admission?</p>
<p>I think math is versatile like ThisCouldBeHeavn’s post shows, but for going to grad schools only, not for getting a job. I mean for example, why would they hire math majors for a computer science job when there are plenty of CS majors out there</p>
<p>As an RN for 24 years…nursing. I’ve always written my own ticket. Not just clinical to choose from-teaching,research,IT,travel,armed forces,occupational,pharmaceuticals.</p>
<p>Will never be outsourced,roboticized (much) Always a demand.</p>
If a math major can code better than a CS major can, and I don’t think it’s that weird, I’m pretty sure that most employers want the math major. And math actually prepares one for coding pretty well, IMHO.</p>
<p>The reason why you see high mid-career salaries for Philosophy majors I would bet is because they are somewhat self-selective. Philosophy is one (or can be) of the harder humanities fields. Philosophy majors also learn how to write well, which can help them throughout their career. However, at graduation, philosophy doesn’t set anyone up for any job.</p>
Philosophy is a popular major for those who plan on law school. Philosophy helped prepare them for law school, but the law degree got them the salary.</p>
<p>Last year I was taking o-chem and I met a philosophy major. He came back to get a second degree (pre-pharm at the time) because philosophy wasn’t helping him land jobs. </p>
<p>He was a great guy and very smart, but he said he mostly found secretarial and paralegal work after his first degree. Nothing wrong with that, but most college majors can set you up for those jobs.</p>
<p>Prior posts have mentioned economics as a versatile major, in part due to ‘strong’ math skills. Yet I have looked at curricula for economics, and typically nothing more than calc III is required. That is not much more than what a strong high school student would know; and is about 1/2 of a math minor. This is less math than any engineer would take outside of civil, while science majors, let alone math majors, have years more of math under their belts.</p>
<p>Hmmm. So perhaps people are saying: jobs that economics majors take also employ people who are even weaker at math, putting the econ folk at the top of pecking order. Fair enough, but if maths was the important differentiator, then any engineering or science major would trump them all easily. But that isn’t the case as a matter of course, so what is going on ? Student intangibles or pre-selection perhaps, but then the major is a marker and not a cause.</p>
<p>“Philosophy is a popular major for those who plan on law school. Philosophy helped prepare them for law school, but the law degree got them the salary.”</p>
<p>I always thought the studies I’ve seen include only those who have just a bachelors. Infact, I’m almost certain of it. </p>
<p>" Yet I have looked at curricula for economics, and typically nothing more than calc III is required."</p>
<p>Just because that’s all that’s required, doesn’t mean that all they all take. That’s what the people studying history of econ take. </p>
<p>Though I guess it’s fair enough to say that some sort of distinction between “Quanty Econ” and “Non-Quanty Econ” should be made.</p>