20 Worst Paying College Degrees

[stringstheory]

Sure, it seems to discourage more theologists, artists and musicians, but the flip side is that it's encouraging more mathematically-inclined studies. And I'm not so sure that what it is encouraging is not as "helpful" to people.

well yeah but i didn't say that; i said a lot of the stuff on that list IS helpful and therefore it's a little alarming that people who go into these fields don't appear to be as "valued". it's great science and mathematically inclined fields are being encouraged, for a long time i don't think they were; but if the list is any indicator, it's coming at the cost of underpaying other very helpful skill-sets and frankly that's pretty unwise and unfair. not everyone can be skilled enough at math and science to pursue a career in it, and nor should they; otherwise we'd have an over-saturated field.

Math and science education in the U.S. is wanting. What's alarming from this article is the prospect of discouraging pay for teaching these subjects, which are in demand and bring higher salaries, and, imho, greater social utility than another theology teacher.

can't they bring, at least roughly, the same amount of value? many of the fields on this list are valuable, in addition to some of ones that are being promoted. It's not a contest, we can value all kinds of different areas of knowledge (and i'd argue that we should) so why should teaching one subject be more valued than the other? The fact that teaching any subject and passing on knowledge appears to be discouraged and undervalued is a disturbing trend, especially if a couple of those fields ultimately become higher paying jobs further on down the road.

Perhaps the philosophy majors end up pursuing more profitable jobs. Then again, I also tend to decouple valuable from "well-remunerated." i chose my arguably impractical, yet very valuable to me college major knowing that it wasn't going to bring in the money and doubled it with something more practical.

what is/was it? just curious

 

[INA]

i didn't say that; i said a lot of the stuff on that list IS helpful and therefore it's a little alarming people who go into these fields. it's great scientists and mathematically inclined fields are being encouraged, but if the list is any indicator, it's coming at the cost of underpaying other very helpful skill-sets and frankly that's pretty unwise and unfair. not everyone can be skilled at math and science, and nor should they; otherwise we'd have an over-saturated field.

Agreed some are useful, though I wouldn't say a lot. I think oversaturation has to do with why some are on the list. Genuine uselessness underlies some others. And then there are the rest, casualties of politics.

can't they bring, at least roughly, the same amount of value? I'm arguing that these fields are all valuable in addition to the ones that are being promoted.

Don't know how you're measuring value here. The difference is the degree of value to the payer.

It's not a contest, we can value all kinds of different areas of knowledge (and i'd argue that we should) so why should teaching one subject be more valued than the other?The fact that teaching any subject and passing on knowledge appears to be discouraged and undervalued is a disturbing trend.

It's not a "should." It's an "is" based on supply and demand. Sure, you can value teaching anything and everything from basketweaving to Noetic Jediism. But I don't see how a choice to study this brings an expectation to be rewarded (with more money) for it. That presupposes some kind of equality of necessity and usefulness that exists only in ideals.

especially if a couple of those fields ultimately become higher paying jobs further on down the road.

This is what worries me. Not so much because they pay higher, but what the higher pay in some cases signifies -- that they are fulfilling a need that we recognize with the pay because of the particular skill set.

what is/was it? just curious

check reps!

 

[Weber]

Law is one of the worst-paying degrees?

 

[IZthe411]

For a lot of people in those fields that are worst paying, the fact that they have a humanity-based payout is fulfilling enough. Sure you can get more $$$ in the business world, but a lot of people are in it just for the money, and they hate their lives.

I read a book where they stated if you don't like what you do for work, the rest of your life will not be happy, regardless of what you make.

 

[stringstheory]

Agreed some are useful, though I wouldn't say a lot. I think oversaturation has to do with why some are on the list. Genuine uselessness underlies some others. And then there are the rest, casualties of politics

Fair enough; i was having a discussion about this with my roommate the other day, actually. i think that college in general is pretty over-saturated and i'm inclined to think more than a few subjects on the list should be in a trade school rather than college (culinary arts, interior design).

Don't know how you're measuring value here. The difference is the degree of value.

As i said earlier, potential assist/ and serve and/or push the community forward (local, national, global) is how i'm measuring value. Math and science certainly fall under both categories. So do many of the ones i listed in my initial post. YMMV.

how are you defining "usefulness"?

It's not a "should." It's an "is" based on supply and demand.

check the type you're arguing with here of course i'm gonna argue as a "should"; "how it is" doesn't make it right and i can't tell what point you're trying to make with a statement like that. Am i supposed to think it's ok that the things i and others are good at are, apparently, the "wrong" ones? Should it be an answer that satisfies my problems?

i don't want to come across as appearing hostile, but i really don't understand what "how it is" is supposed to mean as someone who plans on busting her butt to help others (social workers often work some very long and irregular hours). Loving what i do is the most important thing on my list, and probably on the list of many who go into more humanitarian fields as IZthe411 mentioned, but for those who care deeply enough to go into such fields, it's a little disconcerting to see that something that important is apparently not really cared about enough to be compensated well for it. Sure loving what i do is important, but so is not having money-related issues.

Sure, you can value teaching anything and everything from basketweaving to Noetic Jediism (yeah I just made that up).

this is bordering on mis-representing my argument, so let's stick with something like Theology since i actually listed that along-side some other more "intellectual" pursuits. beyond the actual subject material, i don't see it as being too different than studying something like theoretical physics.

But I don't see how a choice to study this bring an expectation to be rewarded for it.

Because it's making a contribution to our society in some way? What's so outrageous about expecting compensation for that? especially considering being a productive member of society is arguably something this country promotes so heavily, and we tend to measure this with the almighty dollar.

If we agree that monetary compensation = encouragement, then what justifies discouraging some of the fields i listed?

also, did you actually mean Jediism, or Judaism?

check reps!

Ah! yay


also, sorry, i edit a lot >.<

Law is one of the worst-paying degrees?

i'm thinking the list encompasses undergraduate work..i'd love to see what the statistics say about graduate and post-graduate work, though.

 

[INA]

Fair enough; i was having a discussion about this with my roommate the other day, actually. i think that college in general is pretty over-saturated and i'm inclined to think more than a few subjects on the list should be in a trade school rather than college (culinary arts, interior design).

My sentiments exactly. The college racket does a disservice to many.

how are you defining "usefulness"?

Presuming there are particular goals to be accomplished, the degree to which the particular skill helps to reach the designated goals.

check the type you're arguing with here

Not arguing, tho I guess the type I'm discussing with might see it differently.

Am i supposed to think it's ok that the things i and others are good at are, apparently, the "wrong" ones? Should it be an answer that satisfies my problems?

Well, I don't know about what you're supposed to think, but presuming your "problem" is that you are good at and prefer to do something that is not paid so well (possibly because many others are good at it and pursuing it and possibly because people don't care for it), then I suppose there are 2 main ways to satisfy yourself: accept that your chief reward comes from the experience of doing what you like though it doesn't pay well or do something that people want to pay more for.

i don't want to come across as appearing hostile, but i really don't understand what "how it is" is supposed to mean as someone who plans on busting her butt to help others (social workers often work some long hours). Loving what i do is the most important thing on my list, but what's wrong with wanting to avoid money troubles?

No hostility taken (I'm NT, try harder) and none intended. There's nothing wrong with wanting to avoid money troubles. There are more and less efficient ways to do so. It behooves someone who cares about that to cut their cloth accordingly.

this is bordering on mis-representing my argument, so let's stick with something like Theology since i actually listed that along-side some other more "intellectual" pursuits. beyond the actual subject material, i don't see it as being too different than studying something like theoretical physics.

Many would beg to differ with your assessment of difference (or lack thereof). The disagreement is voiced with their wallets. You lose. Questions?
Or they agree, but there are 20 people available to teach theology and 2 for theoretical physics. You still lose.

Because it's making a contribution to our society in some way? What's so outrageous about expecting compensation for that? especially considering being a productive member of society is arguably something this country promotes so heavily, and we tend to measure this with the almighty dollar.If we agree that monetary compensation = encouragement, then what justifies discouraging some of the fields i listed?

That's exactly what's happening. But you don't like the results of the measurement. You could take your ball and go home. Maybe they'll miss you and throw a couple more bucks your way.

 

[stringstheory]

Presuming there are particular goals to be accomplished, the degree to which the particular skill helps to reach the designated goals.

Hm, alright.

Not arguing, tho I guess the type I'm discussing with might see it differently.

True; i don't see arguing as a bad thing though, more along the same lines of debate i guess. i guess i have a tendency to use the two interchangeably.

Well, I don't know about what you're supposed to think, but presuming your "problem" is that you are good at and prefer to do something that is not paid so well (possibly because many others are good at it and pursuing it and possibly because people don't care for it), then I suppose there are 2 main ways to satisfy yourself: accept that your chief reward comes from the experience of doing what you like though it doesn't pay well or do something that people want to pay more for.

Well that's what i plan on doing because realistically i don't appear to have many other options the fact that it becomes limited to these two choices and that's just how it is, simply does not satisfy me as a principle-driven person. that's the "problem".

Many would beg to differ with your assessment of difference (or lack thereof). The disagreement is voiced with their wallets. You lose. Questions?

hm, can't argue with that i suppose.

That's exactly what's happening. But you don't like the results of the measurement. You could take your ball and go home. Maybe they'll miss you and throw a couple more bucks your way.

no of course i don't, thus why i expressed discontent the first place it's pretty sad to me that many of the things listed don't appear to be that big of a concern in the grand scheme of things when, from how i perceive things, it should be.

I'm not sure what taking my ball and going home would entail, or even really achieve.

 

[INA]

It's a raised fist at a cruel, cruel world.
Some people go for that sort of thing.

 

[Chunes]

The problem with a lot of things on this list is that institutionalizing/standardizing them completely neuters them. Social work is a good example. The usefulness of social work is absolutely shredded by the very nature of its structure. A lot of social workers feel like they're not allowed to actually help, and sometimes actually do harm because of the red tape they have to deal with.

 

[FDG]

I've read a paper (which I don't have enough energy to find) that showed how these studies tend to be conceptually flawed, that is: it's impossible to distinguish - on the surface - whether such degrees are worst-paying because they're intrinsically less valuable, or because people which are attracted to such degrees are less likely to consider being wealthy as an important value / important part of their career. Thus, they set up an infragenerational panel which showed that even prior to entering college, people that chose those subjects valued money less (on average) than most of their peers.

 

[Thalassa]

That's horrifying. Education and Social Work? Really? Though I'm surprised Literature and Communications didn't also make that list.

 

[Thalassa]

Also, I want to punch the person who called a teaching degree a "lazy" "easy" degree in the fucking face.

Like, yeah, I'd like to set them on fire and roast them over a pit.

A teaching degree is a double major that requires about 800 hours of student observation and student teaching outside of regular school work and writing papers. WHAT THE FUCK?

As if teaching isn't a demanding position. God, grand me the serenity to not be homicidal.

 

[entropie]

One of the worst jobs in Germany, considered the amount of work, payment and responsibility, is hospital doctor or nurse.

There's a serious flaw in a system where those who attend to the basic needs of its people, like doctors or social workers, are rewarded the lowest amount of money.

 

[Neutralpov]

oh wait pick me

It doesn't list student services. I am getting my master's in it and I had to add another to it (counseling) to make it viable outside a university and financially.

Technical name is Higher Education Administraion, but I was never a teacher so I can't be a principal which is where the money would be for this master's.

 

[Vasilisa]

Worst-Paying College Degrees in 2010
College Degree / Starting Pay / Mid-Career Pay
1. Child and Family Studies / $29,500 / $38,400

I actually always think of athletes for this one. In my experience this was a really popular major for college athletes.