Personal preference versus economic compulsion in degree choice

[aneeshm]

In India, for the vast majority of people who can afford a degree, the choice of what degree to pursue is not something they do based on personal preference, as it is too risky. They are pretty much commanded by their parents (who are a reflection of economic reality) to choose one of the "safe" options - engineering or medicine, or, in some cases, a business degree. Mostly, it's engineering.

Even within engineering, there is very little choice afforded to the child - disciplines are ranked on an economic desirability basis, and you go for the "highest" one you qualify for. So today, if computers is popular, every Ram, Shyam, and Hari wants to go for computers, even if he knows Jack Sh*t about the topic and has even less interest.

This creates a problem. In a normal situation, those who are interested in a field are generally the ones who tend to move to that field - so the people on an engineering campus are the ones who genuinely want to be there. What happens here is that whenever a field happens to catch the public imagination, the ones who have the greatest ability to score on the entrance examinations tend to gravitate towards it, crowding out the ones who are really interested.

Now, I consider myself exceptionally lucky in that I had the freedom to pursue a degree of my choice, and that I also had the test scores to get what I wanted. Most people do not have this luxury. That is probably also why I am probably more objective when trying to understand how the system works, and how it should or could.



I wanted opinions on this (what do you think of how the Indian system works), and also insight on how the system works in your own country. In your corner of the world, how much weight do the competing imperatives of economic compulsion as against personal preference for a given field have when an individual makes the choice to study one field instead of another?

[Heraclitus]

Over here economic compulsion is pretty important but the irony is that most people choose what they think is in demand but is actually for the most part, not or was in demand a decade or more ago (businesses degrees are a good example, people go for those ignoring that the labor market over here is saturated with those).
The wonderful nanny state pays for your studies (you can even change your mind once and its still covered) but the living and secondary expenses are still considerable.


People are for the most part able to go to study what they want, entrance exams are not *that* high on most schools and you can always just buy your way in (this is true for all except med school, there you must have a high average). Family pressure plays a major role in choosing what to study.

[onodera]

Re: Personal preference versus economic compulsion in degree choice

Originally posted by aneeshm
So today, if computers is popular, every Ram, Shyam, and Hari wants to go for computers, even if he knows Jack Sh*t about the topic and has even less interest.

I wish someone would deport Hari. He doesn't know anything about either the business processes of the bank or the ABS their team is deploying, and he's still employed.
aneeshm, could it be some caste affirmative action thing?

[johncmcleod]

Great thread. The US has a university system completely different from the rest of the world's. The practice here is that you live at the university instead of in an apartment in the city, so university is really more of a social thing for most people. It has its own society and culture since you have a bunch of 18-22 year olds living, eating, sleeping, and studying together all the time. They aren't really adults yet and often times aren't aware at all of economic realities, thus studies and figuring out what you want to do take a back seat to playing the social game.

Luckily, we have the least specialized university system in the world. We have majors, which you study probably less than half the time, as opposed to simply going to engineering school. In many places in Europe, I believe, you're separated into different schooling groups by middle school. And in most of the world, you have a career path when you go to university and follow it, and go to a special school where you only take classes according to that path. In the US it's much different, you have all of these distribution requirements and have to take a variety of courses. After a couple of years you choose your major and simply have to get in your major requirements, while you can study whatever you want for the rest of it. The extent of this system varies greatly, as there are of course many schools that are highly specialized, particularly tech schools. But this is the primary system used by the main universities. Another thing is that 4 years is the norm for graduation in the US, while in other countries many tracks take 6 or 7 years and are much more rigorous.

I happen to go to a private liberal arts school, where the lack of specialization is at its highest extreme. You do not decalre a major until the end of sophomore year. You have a load of distribution requirements. During your freshman year, you cannot take more than one class of the same discipline during a semester, and sophomore year, no more than two. There are no specialized or pre-professional majors, such as Business or Pre-Med or Pre-Law. You would probably study Economics, Biology, or Political Science, respectively. The idea is that you study what you want for the sake of wanting to study it. The rest will come later and you will eventually find your career path. The idea is to mold you into a well-rounded, critical thinker that can succeed in a variety of fields.

I prefer this, as education as opposed to career preparation is the primary goal. The idea is to go to school for the sake of learning. But this comes at a hefty price, as you have to pay lots to get great professors and small class sizes. I realize this isn't a possibility in many places. In a place like India you can't afford to study something impractical, the job market is too cutthroat. I think we'd all prefer the US system (at least the non-specialized part and lack of pressure), or at least the fact that in the US you can choose between specialized and non-specialized and neither will bite you in the ass necessarily, but for many that's just not possible.

[Dinner]

If you're poor you dream about money and if you have money then you dream about happiness. Most westerners are relatively well off and now they're working on the happiness part rather then just maximizing more money.

[Jon Miller]

So physics majors in your undergrad, johnmcleod, are either woefully prepared when they graduate, or take at least 5 years to graduate.

I think people should be reasonable with their education, and realize that they aren't going to make money with their Arts degree. However, I also like that people can do what they wish and change...

JM

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
I prefer this, as education as opposed to career preparation is the primary goal. The idea is to go to school for the sake of learning. But this comes at a hefty price, as you have to pay lots to get great professors and small class sizes. I realize this isn't a possibility in many places. In a place like India you can't afford to study something impractical, the job market is too cutthroat. I think we'd all prefer the US system (at least the non-specialized part and lack of pressure), or at least the fact that in the US you can choose between specialized and non-specialized and neither will bite you in the ass necessarily, but for many that's just not possible.

Please bump this post after you graduate +2 years and let us know how you've found the real world. I have a lot of friends (and these aren't people who went to directional schools) who found the transition to the real world from where you are to be quite painful.

[Ben Kenobi]

What about the transition to the real world is difficult? It's much easier then school ever was for me. I work, I come home, I work, I come home. No homework, and I get paid for doing what I do. I don't have to put up with profs shoving crap down my throat in order to get the degree with the name on the dotted line.

As for the value of my arts degree, I do consulting right now, just because my boss needs someone who has one, as he doesn't. He doesn't need a business degree because he can run his own business just fine.

My job at the moment is working with computers, I am building an online store. It helps that I know my way around a database, which is something I taught myself in my spare time.

I think it's important for everyone to learn a trade of some sort that they can fall back on, especially if they have an arts degree.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

I think it's important for everyone to learn a trade of some sort that they can fall back on, especially if they have an arts degree.

Just out of curiosity, BK, in which art do you have a degree?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What about the transition to the real world is difficult? It's much easier then school ever was for me. I work, I come home, I work, I come home. No homework, and I get paid for doing what I do. I don't have to put up with profs shoving crap down my throat in order to get the degree with the name on the dotted line.

Its not so much the working as it is finding work. And then finding work in a satisfying area. The job market can be pretty brutal for liberal arts grads. Though I think a sense of entitlement has something to do with it-you don't go to college expecting to be a cube farmer.

[Starchild]

I followed my interests. All the way into biochemistry.

[Ben Kenobi]

Just out of curiosity, BK, in which art do you have a degree?

History.

[Ben Kenobi]

Its not so much the working as it is finding work. And then finding work in a satisfying area. The job market can be pretty brutal for liberal arts grads. Though I think a sense of entitlement has something to do with it-you don't go to college expecting to be a cube farmer.

Most of what they learn is crap, so no wonder. If they just cruise along through university and expect the real world to be the same they are in trouble.

They have to take responsibility for their own education, not just rely on the profs to prepare them.

The best thing about arts is learning to write and learning to research. If you learn how to do both of these, you'll definitely have work along the line, even if it isn't directly in your field. These skills are always useful. Most of the crap in your degree is not.

[onodera]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


History.

This sounds like a Russian joke, BK. Our past is unpredictable, so I guess writing a cohesive history is art.

[Ben Kenobi]

This sounds like a Russian joke, BK. Our past is unpredictable, so I guess writing a cohesive history is art.

I wouldn't doubt it. You Russians sure love your history. If I ever go back to school, I'll do a thesis on the first battle of Tannenburg.