<p>ucbalumnus:</p>
<p>Understood about Biology being < other majors. But that wasn’t the point. The point is $35k is more than the $12/hour I see mentioned on this board. Of course, again, we have no way of knowing if those jobs were in the field though.</p>
<p>The B.S. in Chemistry teaches you less about actual chemistry than the B.S. in Chemical Engineering.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you mean by “actual chemistry”?</p>
<p>I’m sick of these ■■■■■■ like sschoe and LastThreeYears hopping onto every science major thread to knock biology and chemistry. It seems like it’s been at least a year since I started watching you pathetic ****** bags *****, don’t you have anything better to do?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I appreciate your concern, but do you have contrary statistics/arguments you can offer in support of your view?</p>
<p>Good question, what is “actual chemistry”?</p>
<p>At its heart chemistry is defined as the study of the properties of matter, its transformations, and the processes of those transformations. This is exactly what you learn in chemical engineering. All the useful courses in chemistry (general/organic/physical) are learned, as they explicitly fit the definition of chemistry. In addition, they take more thermodynamics classes than straight chemistry majors. Thermodynamics is the study of the flow of energy during material transformations, fitting rigorously with the definition of chemistry. They also take courses in reaction kinetics, materials science, fluid mechanics, heat transfer and mass transfer. Mass transfer explicitly fits the rigorous definition chemistry, as it studies processes in materials transformations - diffusion and convection. Fluid mechanics is strongly related with thermodynamics and mass transfer, so while not rigorously fitting the definition of chemistry, it is related. Heat transfer is also strongly related with thermodynamics. Reaction kinetics combines all these aspects and studies the rate of matter transformations and processes - fitting the rigorous definition of chemistry. Materials science is obvious.</p>
<p>This is, therefore, on top of the chemistry core, 2 thermo + materials + kinetics + fluids + heat transfer + mass transfer = 7 core engineering classes specifically defined as chemistry.</p>
<p>In contrast, while the B.S. Chemistry’s core chemistry classes are shared with B.S. Chemical Engineering, they take many classes that do NOT fit the definition of chemistry. Classes like biochemistry do not fit the rigorous definition of chemistry, as it does not concern itself with the GENERAL properties, transformations and processes of matter, but with a highly specific system: organic reactions in aqueous media.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes but I choose to spend a little time giving honest advice to prospective science majors about the abuse and exploitation that science majors are forced to endure. I liked science since elementary school. It pains me that I now have to leave the field and warn others not to go into it. A passion that took a decade to make grad school and the private sector beat out of me in just a few years.</p>
<p>What I can’t stand is American companies denying benefits and paying their science staff less than garbageman and then go to Congress and whine all day that there is a science shortage and that they need h1-b’s because Americans are too lazy and stupid for science. I got news Americans are not too stupid for science they are too smart for it. Until there is a major shift in attitude and reforms I will continue to advise all Americans to recognize the call for more science majors for what it is: a cry for real smart suckers. I am tired of watching my classmates and myself who are bright and full of potential victimized and abused by amoral PI and corporate execs. In short, I would like to stop this cycle of abuse.</p>
<p>BTW why are you so offended by what I have to say? If you disagree with my assessment of science just ignore me and get the degree and report back what kind of career you get from it. Just don’t go advising other to do so unless you can present some information that refutes the overwhelming stats and anecdotes provided by all the people here and elsewhere that fell victim to the science degree scam.</p>
<p>“What I can’t stand is American companies denying benefits and paying their science staff less than garbageman and then go to Congress and whine all day that there is a science shortage and that they need h1-b’s because Americans are too lazy and stupid for science.”</p>
<p>sschoe2, Have you written to your elected local and national representatives about these issues? What about encouraging the media to do an investigative story? Perhaps you are the person to start an awareness campaign to bring these issues to light. That would be a much more effective way to make a change than to discourage kids from majoring in science. The implied result of the tactic you are currently taking is to merely abandon all future science endeavors to non-Americans. Just a thought…</p>
<p>I disagree. The elected officials are well aware of the issues going on they just don’t care or side with companies that want cheaper STEM labor. Alan Greenspan specifically said the H1-B program was a good idea to keep STEM wages lower for companies. </p>
<p>I’m afraid the only way I can see to reform science is to cut off the supply of suckers/victims so companies can no longer get away with mistreating them. If our society wants to abuse scientists perhaps they just don’t deserve them. </p>
<p>Companies act like three year olds that break their toys over and over again and scream and cry for new ones. At some point the proper response is not to keep giving them new ones to break.</p>
<p>In the meantime, given the abusive conditions in science I cannot in good conscience advice anyone to go into it. That is a kin to watching someone walk in front of an oncoming train and not try to warn them.</p>
<p>Also keep in mind that the government is paying to train scientists via grants, student loans, graduate tuition waivers etc. and these scientists then leave the field in disgust. That is very wasteful of resources and taxpayer money. I know all the money that you and every other American taxpayer paid to help train me in science is about to go down the toilet.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You would likely be taken more seriously if you limited your criticism to biology and chemistry (rather than lumping all “science” majors together), since university career surveys indicate that graduates in other sciences like physics, (applied) math, statistics, and computer science graduates do much better.</p>
<p>Granted, biology is a very popular major. But it seem that it is mostly used as a “pre-med major” (even though medical schools do not require any particular major); the majority who do not get into any medical school then flood the job market. It is a bad situation for those who want to study biology for other reasons.</p>
<p>I normally qualify my arguments to biology and chemistry, which I have direct knowledge and experience with, though I sometimes get lazy and just say science.</p>
<p>Most of the people who do well with Physics and applied math are not working in fields directly related to physics from what I gather. They instead work as actuaries, quants, and investment bankers from what I gather so my advice about science careers stands.</p>
<p>Yes, some physics majors do go into finance. But others go into other technical or engineering fields (though more so the ones where professional licensing requiring an ABET accredited engineering program is less of an issue, like CS and some areas of EE, rather than something like civil engineering where a PE license is pretty much mandatory).</p>
<p>Similarly, finance is one (though not the only) thing that applied math and statistics are specifically applied to.</p>
<p>In any case, the additional job and career options in finance and the like help make the job and career outlook much better for physics, (applied) math, and statistics majors than it is for biology and chemistry majors. But it is not the only thing that makes it better – the other thing that is likely making the biology and chemistry job dismal is the overabundance of failed pre-meds flooding the market.</p>