Why the us should cut useless courses from college degrees.

[Kernen]

Well, for the purposes of what she was saying, Communications is the degree to get. Also, as a science major, I'm going to go out and say that science is not for everyone, and there are a lot of good career paths a communications degree opens up.

Such as...?

Anything involving media has a tie-in to a communications degree. It can be anything from telecommunications to advertising to professional editing to journalism.

[Imperial Joseon]

Such as...?

Anything involving media has a tie-in to a communications degree. It can be anything from telecommunications to advertising to professional editing to journalism.

All right. I accept your point; I was wrong.

[Forsher]

Sort of.

Most of it is applied common sense... for example, the sunk cost fallacy... married to preaching about the value of networking, personal marketing (although this might count as applied common sense) and meeting people who want to work at a Big Four accounting firm. And then, after years of this, they try and backtrack to get you to come back and be a postgraduate.

Source. (The MBA esque stuff seems mostly to consist of people who are already in business so the courses are basically a type of networking function. I don't actually know what content's in those but I imagine it consists of jargonified common sense all the same.)

Imagine paying tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to make friends and prove you have common sense.

Oh, no-one makes friends at the University of Auckland.

Also, it's all interest free student loans. And lately with the first year free.

But, assuming we can generalise to the rest of the world's business schools. Quite.

[Kubra]

Well, for the purposes of what she was saying, Communications is the degree to get. Also, as a science major, I'm going to go out and say that science is not for everyone, and there are a lot of good career paths a communications degree opens up.

Such as...?

A lot of companies hire folks to look after their social media profiles, and you'll sometimes see them folks in cafe's, hanging out yet inexplicably getting paid.
Usually they've got communication backgrounds.

[Fahran]

You don't need an MBA to know basic math and common sense.

You don't need a political science degree to know basic statistics or a gender studies degree to write about feminism and trans issues either. It still helps frame your approach to those fields and let's people know that you probably know a bit more about the subject than the average person. And, beyond that, time value of money, supply-chain management, and accountancy aren't really basic math or common sense. Most people have to be trained on how to do them. MBA's serve a function. So can we please stop implying that this or that person's degree is functionally worthless when we have minimal knowledge on the subject?

Get a comm degree, then.

A comm degree only offers a small sliver of the skills I mentioned. Again, MBA's and comm degrees both have their uses. They're not equivalents though.

I didn't say that. I simply indicated that its one of many symptoms of the problem.

I think you're misdiagnosing.

Its a symptom of the endless pursuit of profit for a minority of the population at the expense of the majority of the population, and of the exploitation of the people doing all of the real work of actually earning that profit.

I disagree. Mostly because I don't think this argument is sustainable outside of a framework that was antiquated close to a century ago.

[Forsher]

You don't need an MBA to know basic math and common sense.

You don't need a political science degree to know basic statistics or a gender studies degree to write about feminism and trans issues either. It still helps frame your approach to those fields and let's people know that you probably know a bit more about the subject than the average person. And, beyond that, time value of money, supply-chain management, and accountancy aren't really basic math or common sense. Most people have to be trained on how to do them. MBA's serve a function. So can we please stop implying that this or that person's degree is functionally worthless when we have minimal knowledge on the subject?

Accounting is pretty much just basic maths. I really don't understand how people screw up the budgets.

Of course, I haven't done any advanced accounting and there is a big difference between the computations and knowing what to do but if you can do simple maths, certain aspects of accounting are really just exercises in common sense. Which is not to say that GAAP and so forth are obvious/self-evident, just that once you know them I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who'd ask why you'd do it another way. (But, again, I've only ever done introductory accounting because accounting sucks.)

Time Value of Money definitely isn't common sense and is very interesting. Of course, it was also in 101 so it's not exactly something you need a degree for. Not that I'd necessarily try and sell an MBA based on Finance... there's MBAs and then there's quants. Finance is for quants.

When it comes to statistics... I'd be sceptical of anyone doing Political Science for statistics. Same as anyone doing accounting for statistics (they use regression for some stuff... now regression isn't basic maths but it's easy to understand and do with computers but I don't know so much because this was very much a "real accountants would use regression for this but in 101 we're doing something else".... I think this was to do with depreciation).

Despite this nit picking (and my earlier replies to Gren), I basically agree with you though Fahran. Just to be clear.

Get a comm degree, then.

A comm degree only offers a small sliver of the skills I mentioned. Again, MBA's and comm degrees both have their uses. They're not equivalents though.

Can we not shorten communications to comm? It looks way too much like BCom which is usually referred to as commerce and is a bread and butter qualification in the developed world (i.e. Australia and NZ).

Disclaimer: Forsher (technically, kind of) has a BCom.

I didn't say that. I simply indicated that its one of many symptoms of the problem.

I think you're misdiagnosing.

Its a symptom of the endless pursuit of profit for a minority of the population at the expense of the majority of the population, and of the exploitation of the people doing all of the real work of actually earning that profit.

I disagree. Mostly because I don't think this argument is sustainable outside of a framework that was antiquated close to a century ago.

I'm lost here... would probably need to read the quote chain, which I'm not going to do.

To the superficial sentiment of "people doing all of the real work of actually earning that profit". Yeah... look, I'm perfectly willing to argue that trickle down is bullshit, that supply side economics is overstated and that the real backbone of the modern economy is consumption (supply side policies should be about facilitating responsiveness). The problem is... once you start making that argument, then workers become pretty trivial. Yes, it's their money that creates the profit (or, more accurately, the impression of potential profit that attracts the investors who then become billionaires off the animal spirits), but actually making and doing stuff doesn't add much value at all. No, it's the con artists that convince you to buy into, say, the Apple ecosystem and the pricks who created the idea of an ecosystem and the (largely nameless) individuals who created the mechanisms which allow the animal spirits to run rampant that create the enormous profits.

(Also, the greatest trick the devil pulled was making people think Apple's fugly products are aesthetically desirable.)

In an exploitative society, the exploited are a commodity whose contribution to the success of the exploiting class is, functionally, no different to krill's responsibility for the size of a blue whale. Necessary, but not sufficient.

[Fahran]

Accounting is pretty much just basic maths. I really don't understand how people screw up the budgets.

It's governed by a pretty rigorous set of rules and standards when it comes to classifying accounts and assessing values, and those can impact the quality of financial analyses. My daddy is an accountant. There's a reason the CPA exam is considered by some to be more difficult than the bar exam. It's because it's not really basic maths when you get to the level where you're managing the accounts of a large corporation or doing audits. The average person is going to make a lot of mistakes and, in accounting, mistakes'll get you fired, mislead investors, and cause companies to go out of business.

Of course, I haven't done any advanced accounting and there is a big difference between the computations and knowing what to do but if you can do simple maths, certain aspects of accounting are really just exercises in common sense. Which is not to say that GAAP and so forth are obvious/self-evident, just that once you know them I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who'd ask why you'd do it another way. (But, again, I've only ever done introductory accounting because accounting sucks.)

I believe it gets far more difficult after the introductory courses. As I mentioned, there's a consensus among professionals that the CPA exam is harder than the bar exam because of the extensive studying required and broad range of problems you can encounter when taking it. I've heard intermediate courses are the ones that weed people out. I took the intro classes and found them easy, but, again, I'm a biochemistry major so I don't feel like I can comment authoritatively. I'm going off what my daddy had to say on the subject. And he's taken the CPA exam.

Time Value of Money definitely isn't common sense and is very interesting. Of course, it was also in 101 so it's not exactly something you need a degree for. Not that I'd necessarily try and sell an MBA based on Finance... there's MBAs and then there's quants. Finance is for quants.

They play with quite a bit of data in all honesty, both accountants and financiers/financial analysts. I think a lot of people who assume it's a field for slackers or privileged fat cats would find themselves in over their heads within a couple days. I think I could manage it based on how I've done in the few business classes I've taken but I'd be bored stiff. By no means do I think I could sail through the CPA exam. At the moment, I'd fail every portion of it. Badly. I just don't have the knowledge, the technique, and the mindset for it. Hence why I'm not studying accountancy.

When it comes to statistics... I'd be sceptical of anyone doing Political Science for statistics. Same as anyone doing accounting for statistics (they use regression for some stuff... now regression isn't basic maths but it's easy to understand and do with computers but I don't know so much because this was very much a "real accountants would use regression for this but in 101 we're doing something else".... I think this was to do with depreciation).

I view sociology and political science as roughly the same in that regard. They both employ the scientific method, logic, and statistics at a level that goes well beyond what an uneducated person can usually do. Computers can do a lot at the moment, but I don't think automation is going to replace people in the STEM fields or social sciences altogether. It's more of a useful tool that we sometimes want to check.

Despite this nit picking (and my earlier replies to Gren), I basically agree with you though Fahran. Just to be clear.

Okay.

[Purpelia]

As far as statistics go I'd make them mandatory in every highschool ever. Knowing statistics lets you get a much clearer picture of just how brazenly politicians lie to you all the time.

[The Black Forrest]

As far as statistics go I'd make them mandatory in every highschool ever. Knowing statistics lets you get a much clearer picture of just how brazenly politicians lie to you all the time.

What was the quote? There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies and statistics.

Not everybody has the mind for it let alone care......

[Fahran]

As far as statistics go I'd make them mandatory in every highschool ever. Knowing statistics lets you get a much clearer picture of just how brazenly politicians lie to you all the time.

We couldn't get people to not believe silly conspiracy theories despite teaching research methods in high schools. I doubt statistics lessons will make much of an impact until we can properly engage students. That said, our generation is probably still better at that than boomers on the whole. "Wanna hear about how Obama is a foreign-born Kenyan Muslim who attended a racist black church for two decades?" No, Charles. No, I do not.

[Saiwania]

By no means do I think I could sail through the CPA exam. At the moment, I'd fail every portion of it. Badly. I just don't have the knowledge, the technique, and the mindset for it. Hence why I'm not studying accountancy.

The consensus I read is that the CPA is easier than the BAR exam, provided you're good with numbers and math in general. If you can become a Mathematician, chances are you could do Accounting. If you want the money that can be gotten from Accounting, it is nonetheless what you have to do. Maybe there is another path that is just as lucrative if not more- but I don't know it. I'd say it's worthwhile to throw everything at trying to get a high salary, if you can. You only have one life in which to become rich. If you don't, you've failed in a way. Just as I have. People need to avoid such an unpleasant fate.

People don't need family, friends, anything. People just need money to get by. With enough money you can usually get anything else you could want. But you won't get there if you don't become valuable somehow. Not everyone can be rich strictly speaking, but most people can become financially successful if not stable with the right abilities/decisions.

[Kernen]

Accounting is pretty much just basic maths. I really don't understand how people screw up the budgets.

It's governed by a pretty rigorous set of rules and standards when it comes to classifying accounts and assessing values, and those can impact the quality of financial analyses. My daddy is an accountant. There's a reason the CPA exam is considered by some to be more difficult than the bar exam. It's because it's not really basic maths when you get to the level where you're managing the accounts of a large corporation or doing audits. The average person is going to make a lot of mistakes and, in accounting, mistakes'll get you fired, mislead investors, and cause companies to go out of business.

Can confirm. The CPA exam is definitely more difficult then the Bar, not least of which because you need to combine law, ledger management, and abstract business evaluations similar to economics equations. Its the worst parts of right and left brain thinking combined.

The Bar exam is a brutal slog, but the test itself isnt actually that bad once you put the work in.

[Saiwania]

Are there any Accountant jobs that don't require the CPA? I'm thinking that an Accounting degree isn't worthless in that someone can become a book keeper or some lower tier accounting professional and get paid less. But of course, you do need to pass the CPA at least once to become a "real" Accountant and be eligible for the $100,000+/year jobs in that field.

[Fahran]

Are there any Accountant jobs that don't require the CPA? I'm thinking that an Accounting degree isn't worthless in that someone can become a book keeper or some lower tier accounting professional and get paid less. But of course, you do need to pass the CPA at least once to become a "real" Accountant and be eligible for the $100,000+/year jobs in that field.

A quick job search confirms that you do not need to take the CPA exam for a lot of bookkeeping and accounting positions. That said, those tend to pay under $50,000 a year and don't have great prospects of intra-department promotion without taking the CPA exam or obtaining an MBA. I do want to point out that a $50,000 job is still pretty nice as a beginning or intermediate position though. If I opted to go to a lab instead of med school, the most I could probably hope to make would be $40,000 to $60,000 annually. But, yeah, it's not as simple as a lot of people here are making it out to be. And a degree alone is almost never going to land you a job.

[Saiwania]

A quick job search confirms that you do not need to take the CPA exam for a lot of bookkeeping and accounting positions. That said, those tend to pay under $50,000 a year and don't have great prospects of intra-department promotion without taking the CPA exam or obtaining an MBA. I do want to point out that a $50,000 job is still pretty nice as a beginning or intermediate position though. If I opted to go to a lab instead of med school, the most I could probably hope to make would be $40,000 to $60,000 annually. But, yeah, it's not as simple as a lot of people here are making it out to be. And a degree alone is almost never going to land you a job.

If it is relevant to you, it sounds to me like you should go for it. $50,000+ is far above what I can ever realistically earn for now, if ever.

I can't go back to college, but I can go to trade school if it is much cheaper, to see if that route works for me better. What is the other stuff besides the degree or certifications that you need for landing the job? I'm thinking its either some apprenticeship or some key contact (i.e. nepotism), but how do you really go about that if you're lacking in experience and trying to break into a different field you have no history with? (If you know what is needed).

People need to know so that they won't be lost for too long like I was.

[Fahran]

If it is relevant to you, it sounds to me like you should go for it. $50,000+ is far above what I can ever realistically earn for now, if ever.

I'm pretty intent on going into medicine, as much as I enjoy biochemistry and working in the laboratory. And I hope you're wrong. I think everyone has the potential to achieve some measure of greatness if that's their desire, whether that translates to earning a fat pay check, building a strong and loving family, or making a difference in their community. I want to do all three and help as many people as I can along the way. If you want something, go for it.

I can't go back to college, but I can go to trade school if it is much cheaper, to see if that route works for me better.

Electricians, plumbers, and mechanics do pretty well for themselves depending on the region and the sort of work they do. One of my good high school friends, who I dated back then, is an electrician and owns his own business now. He's doing pretty well for himself honestly. By the time I finish med school, I imagine he'll have bought himself a house and settled down. Now that I mention it, I should text him and see how he's been.

What is the other stuff besides the degree or certifications that you need for landing the job? I'm thinking its either some apprenticeship or some key contact (i.e. nepotism), but how do you really go about that if you're lacking in experience and trying to break into a different field you have no history with? (If you know what is needed).

Having job experience in general is a pretty big leg up from what I've heard. I work as a waitress at the moment and I got my current job, despite not having a recommendation due to how my previous job ended, because I managed to get several letters of reference, listed my experience and skills on my resume, and practiced like crazy for what wound up being a very informal and laid-back interview. I'm also a TA and I'm volunteering as a dance teacher once a week at the moment too. So it's a lot.

People need to know so that they won't be lost for too long like I was.

Anyone who's lost can be found. For you, I'd focus on your schooling/apprenticeship and try to network with your instructors and fellow students. A lot of people who work as teachers have some experience and can usually write you a letter of recommendation if you impress them or give you an idea of where to look for a job. I got my TA position through a couple of professors. I got the dance thing because I asked the head of the dance department if I could use the facilities and maybe sign up for some more rigorous intramural classes off-campus.

[Digital Planets]

Anyone who's lost can be found. For you, I'd focus on your schooling/apprenticeship and try to network with your instructors and fellow students. A lot of people who work as teachers have some experience and can usually write you a letter of recommendation if you impress them or give you an idea of where to look for a job. I got my TA position through a couple of professors. I got the dance thing because I asked the head of the dance department if I could use the facilities and maybe sign up for some more rigorous intramural classes off-campus.

Just a reminder, not everyone who is lost wants to be found, just like my heroin-strung alcoholic Janae who is in a rehab facility.

[Grenartia]

You don't need an MBA to know basic math and common sense.

You don't need a political science degree to know basic statistics or a gender studies degree to write about feminism and trans issues either. It still helps frame your approach to those fields and let's people know that you probably know a bit more about the subject than the average person. And, beyond that, time value of money, supply-chain management, and accountancy aren't really basic math or common sense.

Time value of money: people want money as quickly as possible. That's basic common sense. Anyone who has ever needed money for something and not had it likely knows that concept on an intuitive level.

Supply-chain management: Isn't that its own field? Separate from any of the BS in BS that's business degrees? I swear I've heard of people majoring in that specifically.

Accounting: I actually don't lump in accounting with business degrees, and its a perfectly fine, valid, and yes, necessary field. While the math is effectively trivial, its the law part of it that truly matters.

Most people have to be trained on how to do them. MBA's serve a function. So can we please stop implying that this or that person's degree is functionally worthless when we have minimal knowledge on the subject?

Get a comm degree, then.

A comm degree only offers a small sliver of the skills I mentioned. Again, MBA's and comm degrees both have their uses. They're not equivalents though.

I'll grant you marketing isn't strictly comm, but 'business administration' is basically the art of brown nosing.

I didn't say that. I simply indicated that its one of many symptoms of the problem.

I think you're misdiagnosing.

In what way?

Its a symptom of the endless pursuit of profit for a minority of the population at the expense of the majority of the population, and of the exploitation of the people doing all of the real work of actually earning that profit.

I disagree. Mostly because I don't think this argument is sustainable outside of a framework that was antiquated close to a century ago.

Define "sustainable". Because I fail to see how it doesn't perfectly describe what's going on today.

You don't need a political science degree to know basic statistics or a gender studies degree to write about feminism and trans issues either. It still helps frame your approach to those fields and let's people know that you probably know a bit more about the subject than the average person. And, beyond that, time value of money, supply-chain management, and accountancy aren't really basic math or common sense. Most people have to be trained on how to do them. MBA's serve a function. So can we please stop implying that this or that person's degree is functionally worthless when we have minimal knowledge on the subject?

Accounting is pretty much just basic maths. I really don't understand how people screw up the budgets.

Of course, I haven't done any advanced accounting and there is a big difference between the computations and knowing what to do but if you can do simple maths, certain aspects of accounting are really just exercises in common sense. Which is not to say that GAAP and so forth are obvious/self-evident, just that once you know them I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who'd ask why you'd do it another way. (But, again, I've only ever done introductory accounting because accounting sucks.)

Time Value of Money definitely isn't common sense and is very interesting. Of course, it was also in 101 so it's not exactly something you need a degree for. Not that I'd necessarily try and sell an MBA based on Finance... there's MBAs and then there's quants. Finance is for quants.

When it comes to statistics... I'd be sceptical of anyone doing Political Science for statistics. Same as anyone doing accounting for statistics (they use regression for some stuff... now regression isn't basic maths but it's easy to understand and do with computers but I don't know so much because this was very much a "real accountants would use regression for this but in 101 we're doing something else".... I think this was to do with depreciation).

Despite this nit picking (and my earlier replies to Gren), I basically agree with you though Fahran. Just to be clear.

A comm degree only offers a small sliver of the skills I mentioned. Again, MBA's and comm degrees both have their uses. They're not equivalents though.

Can we not shorten communications to comm? It looks way too much like BCom which is usually referred to as commerce and is a bread and butter qualification in the developed world (i.e. Australia and NZ).

Disclaimer: Forsher (technically, kind of) has a BCom.

Over here in the states, we call it comm.

I think you're misdiagnosing.


I disagree. Mostly because I don't think this argument is sustainable outside of a framework that was antiquated close to a century ago.

I'm lost here... would probably need to read the quote chain, which I'm not going to do.

To the superficial sentiment of "people doing all of the real work of actually earning that profit". Yeah... look, I'm perfectly willing to argue that trickle down is bullshit, that supply side economics is overstated and that the real backbone of the modern economy is consumption (supply side policies should be about facilitating responsiveness). The problem is... once you start making that argument, then workers become pretty trivial. Yes, it's their money that creates the profit (or, more accurately, the impression of potential profit that attracts the investors who then become billionaires off the animal spirits), but actually making and doing stuff doesn't add much value at all. No, it's the con artists that convince you to buy into, say, the Apple ecosystem and the pricks who created the idea of an ecosystem and the (largely nameless) individuals who created the mechanisms which allow the animal spirits to run rampant that create the enormous profits.

(Also, the greatest trick the devil pulled was making people think Apple's fugly products are aesthetically desirable.)

In an exploitative society, the exploited are a commodity whose contribution to the success of the exploiting class is, functionally, no different to krill's responsibility for the size of a blue whale. Necessary, but not sufficient.

I think that statement is a textbook example of the inverse of missing the forest for the trees.

You become so obsessed with the scale of the issue that you miss the details at the smallest level that give rise to it in the first place.

[Fahran]

Time value of money: people want money as quickly as possible. That's basic common sense. Anyone who has ever needed money for something and not had it likely knows that concept on an intuitive level.

The calculations and financial analyses of broader investment decisions, on the other hand, comprise an extremely specialized field of applied mathematics and, at times, statistics. I'll grant you that it lacks the difficulty of calculus or more advanced statistics but it's well beyond high school mathematics once you get into the field more than waist-deep.

Supply-chain management: Isn't that its own field? Separate from any of the BS in BS that's business degrees? I swear I've heard of people majoring in that specifically.

There are several different types of "business degrees." Finance, accounting, marketing, operations management, business administration, etc. You can get an MBA in any number of them. I think you're trying to criticize business administration and related interdisciplinary fields but those fields still have their uses for a lot of future small business owners or mid-level managers. As I said, I would trust a business major with five years of work experience over a chemist or engineer if I wanted someone to keep a restaurant afloat. They do learn a lot of concrete skills. They just learn a diverse range of skills instead of specializing in a single one. And that itself is a type of specialization.

Accounting: I actually don't lump in accounting with business degrees, and its a perfectly fine, valid, and yes, necessary field. While the math is effectively trivial, its the law part of it that truly matters.

Again, the math isn't really difficult by university-standards but we do need people out in society who are willing to actually do it. My ex studied finance and business administration. He's fluent in three languages and can do some pretty advanced calculations. The man is obviously very well-educated even if he didn't go into a STEM field and he will add value when he begins working instead of interning.

[MaxWinter]

I agree. Cut useless classes. Such a time wasting thing.

[Neutraligon]

Do not gravedig