The Atlantic: "The Humanities Have Sown the Seeds of Their Own Destruction"

[Hegemony]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

I don't understand that question.

[marshwiggle]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

Is there some sort of competition there?

If I understand your question, then the answer is that disillusionment among graduates seems to be higher in the humanities. Periodically in the news you'll see stories about unemployed engineering graduates who can't get good jobs, etc., but they seem much more rare. If all of the humanities graduates had chosen their programs for personal enrichment, and were content with their employment after graduation, then the "jobs" question wouldn't be coming up.

It is the graduates themselves, talking about their high debt and poor job prospects, that bring up the issue. One way or another, their expectations were out of line with their outcomes.

If that was as common among STEM students, it would be just as common in the news. It's not the outcomes themselves that are the problem; it's the mismatch with expectations, and that seems higher in the humanities.


 

[ciao_yall]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

Is there some sort of competition there?

If I understand your question, then the answer is that disillusionment among graduates seems to be higher in the humanities. Periodically in the news you'll see stories about unemployed engineering graduates who can't get good jobs, etc., but they seem much more rare. If all of the humanities graduates had chosen their programs for personal enrichment, and were content with their employment after graduation, then the "jobs" question wouldn't be coming up.

It is the graduates themselves, talking about their high debt and poor job prospects, that bring up the issue. One way or another, their expectations were out of line with their outcomes.

If that was as common among STEM students, it would be just as common in the news. It's not the outcomes themselves that are the problem; it's the mismatch with expectations, and that seems higher in the humanities.

I don't recall seeing articles about any college grads having trouble getting good jobs. Now, within the first year of graduation? Maybe. A tough economy? Or are they trying to get into a very competitive field, like museum curating, journalism, or the like? But... it's not a thing. Maybe they work at Banana Republic or Starbucks right after they graduate, but they can move pretty quickly into management training programs or other professional roles.

STEM grads have the highest rate of transferring out of their fields upon graduation. So, even though they have high rates of employment, they are not likely to be working in their field of study a few years after graduation. Not sure where I saw that statistic but I cited it in a paper I wrote for my EdD and I don't feel like looking for it.

[marshwiggle]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

Is there some sort of competition there?

If I understand your question, then the answer is that disillusionment among graduates seems to be higher in the humanities. Periodically in the news you'll see stories about unemployed engineering graduates who can't get good jobs, etc., but they seem much more rare. If all of the humanities graduates had chosen their programs for personal enrichment, and were content with their employment after graduation, then the "jobs" question wouldn't be coming up.

It is the graduates themselves, talking about their high debt and poor job prospects, that bring up the issue. One way or another, their expectations were out of line with their outcomes.

If that was as common among STEM students, it would be just as common in the news. It's not the outcomes themselves that are the problem; it's the mismatch with expectations, and that seems higher in the humanities.

I don't recall seeing articles about any college grads having trouble getting good jobs. Now, within the first year of graduation? Maybe. A tough economy? Or are they trying to get into a very competitive field, like museum curating, journalism, or the like? But... it's not a thing. Maybe they work at Banana Republic or Starbucks right after they graduate, but they can move pretty quickly into management training programs or other professional roles.

STEM grads have the highest rate of transferring out of their fields upon graduation. So, even though they have high rates of employment, they are not likely to be working in their field of study a few years after graduation. Not sure where I saw that statistic but I cited it in a paper I wrote for my EdD and I don't feel like looking for it.

I believe I heard somewhere that about 40% of engineering graduates are actually working in "engineering" professions. But lots of the others are working in math-heavy or technical fields where their skills make a big difference. There don't seem to be a lot of those other 60% complaining about their jobs or income.

[Wahoo Redux]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

Is there some sort of competition there?

If I understand your question, then the answer is that disillusionment among graduates seems to be higher in the humanities. Periodically in the news you'll see stories about unemployed engineering graduates who can't get good jobs, etc., but they seem much more rare. If all of the humanities graduates had chosen their programs for personal enrichment, and were content with their employment after graduation, then the "jobs" question wouldn't be coming up.

It is the graduates themselves, talking about their high debt and poor job prospects, that bring up the issue. One way or another, their expectations were out of line with their outcomes.

If that was as common among STEM students, it would be just as common in the news. It's not the outcomes themselves that are the problem; it's the mismatch with expectations, and that seems higher in the humanities.


 

Why are you STEMy folks so obsessed with this?

[Ruralguy]

I think its our stakeholders that are obsessed with these issues, hence, over the years, increased interest in STEM and Business at my school, over, say English, which has lost  a lot of interest. But I will say that "interest" is very different from completion, which is different from completion with good performance, which is different from staying in the field at all after graduation.

[marshwiggle]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

Is there some sort of competition there?

If I understand your question, then the answer is that disillusionment among graduates seems to be higher in the humanities. Periodically in the news you'll see stories about unemployed engineering graduates who can't get good jobs, etc., but they seem much more rare. If all of the humanities graduates had chosen their programs for personal enrichment, and were content with their employment after graduation, then the "jobs" question wouldn't be coming up.

It is the graduates themselves, talking about their high debt and poor job prospects, that bring up the issue. One way or another, their expectations were out of line with their outcomes.

If that was as common among STEM students, it would be just as common in the news. It's not the outcomes themselves that are the problem; it's the mismatch with expectations, and that seems higher in the humanities.


 

Why are you STEMy folks so obsessed with this?

Maybe I misunderstood your original question. What did you mean by this:
'Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?'

[Mobius]

Any Greek philosophers complaining about the state of the field in the fourth century B.C.? I imagine there were plenty.

[Wahoo Redux]

Maybe I misunderstood your original question. What did you mean by this:
'Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?'

Yes.  The job market in the humanities is very bad and getting worse.  You comment frequently upon this.

Why do you care?

[Hibush]

I believe I heard somewhere that about 40% of engineering graduates are actually working in "engineering" professions. But lots of the others are working in math-heavy or technical fields where their skills make a big difference. There don't seem to be a lot of those other 60% complaining about their jobs or income.

My neighbor is in the 60% of that group. She works as a "wealth advisor" for a national brokerage firm. Seems happy about the move from engineering jobs.

[Parasaurolophus]

Why is it that STEM folks have always been caught on the "job" business in regards to the humanities?

Is there some sort of competition there?

If I understand your question, then the answer is that disillusionment among graduates seems to be higher in the humanities. Periodically in the news you'll see stories about unemployed engineering graduates who can't get good jobs, etc., but they seem much more rare. If all of the humanities graduates had chosen their programs for personal enrichment, and were content with their employment after graduation, then the "jobs" question wouldn't be coming up.

It is the graduates themselves, talking about their high debt and poor job prospects, that bring up the issue. One way or another, their expectations were out of line with their outcomes.

If that was as common among STEM students, it would be just as common in the news. It's not the outcomes themselves that are the problem; it's the mismatch with expectations, and that seems higher in the humanities.


 

Why are you STEMy folks so obsessed with this?

It seems to conflate news stories about PhDs with undergraduates. (And yes, even then we should be worried about the availability heuristic. But that conflation sure does a lot of work.)

[marshwiggle]

Why are you STEMy folks so obsessed with this?

It seems to conflate news stories about PhDs with undergraduates. (And yes, even then we should be worried about the availability heuristic. But that conflation sure does a lot of work.)

If that conflation is responsible for declining enrollment in humanities, it's sadly ironic. Institutions that tried to enhance their reputation by producing PhDs who wound up not having good job prospects actually compromised their reputation for prospective undergraduates who think the job picture is bleak for them.

But if that's the case, then in the long term it should be self-correcting; fewer undergrads means fewer PhD candidates down the road, which means fewer excess PhDs, which mean fewer stories of un- or under-employed PhDs, which means it doesn't deter potential undergrads.

[Wahoo Redux]

Why are you STEMy folks so obsessed with this?

It seems to conflate news stories about PhDs with undergraduates. (And yes, even then we should be worried about the availability heuristic. But that conflation sure does a lot of work.)

If that conflation is responsible for declining enrollment in humanities, it's sadly ironic. Institutions that tried to enhance their reputation by producing PhDs who wound up not having good job prospects actually compromised their reputation for prospective undergraduates who think the job picture is bleak for them.

But if that's the case, then in the long term it should be self-correcting; fewer undergrads means fewer PhD candidates down the road, which means fewer excess PhDs, which mean fewer stories of un- or under-employed PhDs, which means it doesn't deter potential undergrads.

Why are you so concerned about all this?