Actually we can’t.
People in those “oversubscribed fields” might have no interest in STEM or something more lucrative.
I suspect you’d be appalled to know that both my Ds are school teachers that attended LACs
@calmom
I sincerely appreciate your tempered response. I guess where I am having trouble is how long it should take for a graduate (especially with a masters) to be self sufficient with a job that pays a living wage.
I Am not bashing, but my expectation for my kids is that they major in something that pays well and they graduate and begin their lives on their own…at graduation. ( not in my basement making $12 an hour)
I am not trying to be snarky whatsoever. We all get an entry level job straight out of school. Mine was in 1992. I majored in marketing and my first entry level job paid more than this gift shop girl with a masters is making in 2020.
I guess I am against the cc grain. We look at our kids skills and say what is the greatest ROI for what you are good at.
2 Likes
I do agree that kids need to have a plan, particularly kids who may end up in fields with limited opportunities, such as academia or the arts, even as I would argue that pushing STEM fields is not the answer for most kids who wouldn’t pick them for themselves, any more than telling a kid with an affinity for engineering they should become a novelist or a courtroom attorney.
One of my kids is in a field that requires no formal degree at all. With some professional training someone with a grade school education could get hired in the field. For the sake of conversation we’ll call it working as a high altitude mountain climbing guide. When our kid burned out on college they seriously considered dropping out, knowing that because of their professional experience they could get hired right away. We discussed the fact that they needed a back-up plan if for some reason they could no longer climb, for instance the ability to write for mountaineering publications or work for an equipment manufacturer. After six months working in the field in what was anticipated to be a year away they decided to finish school.
They graduated with a degree in ancient history. I suspect a lot of people would wonder what the heck studying Romans, Greeks, and the like would do for a mountain climber, but it’s served them well. They use the research, writing, critical thinking, and (yes) quantitative skills they gained in earning the degree every day, and when six months into their new job they learned their employer was up for sale they put together a proposal and bought them out. At that point having a history degree was not an impediment in any way. Would a degree in CS or engineering or Arabic have served them just as well? Probably, but I doubt they would have been able to slog through a degree in any of those fields, not because they’re not smart enough, but because they just don’t like CS, engineering, or Arabic.
I’m not sure if that proves or disproves the OP’s point, or is simply OT, but there it is.
p.s., I didn’t mean post #118 as a pile-on and I’m sorry if it presented as one. I’m off schedule and missed the last few posts before mine.
I think school teaching is a wonderful profession. As is bartending( and I agree with privatebanker, it is remarkably lucrative). There are thousands of great professions for people with various skills sets and interests. Make sure your skill set lines up with your major and likely job options thereafter, and your educational expenses accordingly, and there should be no regrets. If you don’t incur any educational debt, you have more options as repayment is not a concern.
The most “oversubscribed fields” in colleges are often STEM fields (computer science, engineering, etc.). But they are oversubscribed because students are attracted by the career prospects.
Why would anyone be appalled (with respect to financial matters) if their income level is enough for them to live comfortably, save/invest for longer term goals, and pay off any educational debt that they have?
Really, the problems occur when someone’s career path’s income level is not high enough to cover the combination of that person’s spending habits, longer term savings/investment goals, and servicing educational debt needed to enter that career path. A frugal person whose parents had enough money to cover his/her education without debt has a wider range of financially feasable career paths than a spendy person whose parents were unable or unwilling to contribute enough to avoid heavy educational debt.
This reminds me of the alpine archaeology project that’s tried to identify Hannibal’s path across the Alps.
https://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/may16/hannibal-051607.html
2019 is better than 2014 reporting.
Because the implication of an ROI approach is that since they were certain they wanted to be teachers then they should have enrolled in the cheapest possible option regardless of fit,
They have some debt and we have some debt but we also have zero regrets.
I don’t think that is the implication of an ROI approach at all. Make sure your return ( whether monetary, career, emotional, whatever) justifies your investment ( which varies based on debt, parental contribution) in deciding on a college program. It really is a form of fit.
Not necessarily. An ROI approach need only require that the combination of educational cost/debt, career path income level, spending habits, and longer term financial goals work out. It does not require maximizing money or choosing the cheapest college (although students faced with a choice of unaffordable versus barely affordable will find that only the cheapest college is a fit).
Parental money for any necessary education or other career entry costs and personal frugality can give someone lots of options, including the ability to choose a lower income career path without constant financial stress.
I realize this is a long way from post #1, but I sort of liked the tangent into ROI on a Master’s. I guess I’m at the age where I am watching these decisions being made by the young people I know. And while I’m all for more education and education for its own sake, I often wonder at the wisdom of the decision. For the young people who love the field and get funded positions, it’s a no-brainer, for others? One really has to consider the cost/benefit ratio, and I think costs include money, time, delaying life milestones (sometimes) and benefits have to include personal fulfillment as well as job prospects.
Personally, I’ve got one in a field on the least regretted list finishing a masters (professional, no funding) and taking a pay cut to do that kind of work. I, myself gave up another advanced degree because I couldn’t see the expenditure to get, essentially, the low-paying job I have now. I’ve got students who assume that more degrees always means more money.
Anyway, if you all keep responding, I’ll keep reading because I am fascinated!
As you note, more degrees do not necessarily equal more or more lucrative job prospects and grad school is not usually a cost effective default solution for those unsure of their vocation or unable to secure employment.
Our S (currently in senior year) recently decided to decline a great job job offer to remain on campus for an additional year to get his masters. His primary driver was his desire to finish up some research he was conducting. Will it help out in future job offers? Unclear. Will it hurt? Probs not, since paid research position will just about cover all his expenses.
Perhaps the main help or hurt could be timing of the economic or industry cycle in his job interest. If the job market is much better or worse a year later, that can significantly affect entry level job prospects, and potentially longer term career development to the extent that first job affects that (recession graduates tend to have worse careers than others).
Yep, we talked about economic downturns being a real potential. I think he has several things working in his favor that mitigates that risk to an acceptable level.
Happiness matters. My D has paid a lot for her master’s, will take a pay cut to work in the field, but it’s a quality of life and work environment issue.
Also, some take a long time to figure out what they want to be when they grow up and others become things based on pure ROI. Have 9 nephews one became a CPA mainly to ensure good money, (he’s pretty bored), another is in the music industry very risky job wise but he loves it.
I wouldn’t premise that education is solely ROI ( it isn’t if you are a sentient person). Nor, would I push the idea that you can take any old subject without a plan.
A great education gives you the tools you need to do what you want. You still need the social aptitude. And yes, when you graduate matters a lot.
So what’s a non-STEM type student supposed to do exactly? What if math, comp sci, science isn’t her thing and she also detests being a business major after learning about what classes she’d have to take? In this situation, should parents spend less money or more? Try to have the student get into the highest rank school she can get into so she can use the prestige factor? Or suggest she goes to college somewhere less expensive?
This is our situation. We are full pay. I can see our D being a psych major or political science major or maybe communications (although I haven’t even brought that up with her yet and she’d surely want to double major in something more interesting to her). We are still waiting on ACT scores but all of this does make me wonder if she’s better off at a place like Wake Forest or Davidson or if we should be considering spending less money and guiding her to a place like Illinois or Miami of Ohio or Elon where it would cost us less? Maybe it’s just a personal decision but I’m curious if a smaller more elite school would be advantageous if a student is not STEM.
1 Like
Re: #137, last sentence
Is she considering career paths where college prestige matters, or those where it does not?
Of course, there are factors besides prestige that can matter if you and she are in a position to choose between multiple affordable, but differently priced, colleges.
@ucbalumnus Career paths? She has no idea. Neither does S19 and he’s a freshman in college.
But my guess is no. She would never be an investment banker or consultant if that’s what you mean.