[Sourcecode]

Is it really never to late to change a major.
I Picked a pretty shitty major since I was guaranteed a great job after college.

I feel like its to late to change majors in the third year.
But I figure I can take some more math or business classes. I Figure I can always come back to school an better myself and why not have some credits towards a new major already completed?

What do yall think?

[elabayarde]

(04-04-2012 08:25 PM)dulst Wrote:  

Anyone heard of a book called How to Win at College?

It's by a guy called Cal Newport who runs a blog called Study Hacks. I haven't read the book (yet) but his blog has been really useful to me at uni.

With regard to STEM subjects vs Arts, STEM is only worthwhile if you're fucking good at it.

This is something noone talks about. Everyone harps on about how you should pick X subject over Y, or attend A college or do what you love or whatever. These people don't consider the most important factor - ability.

There's no point picking maths over philosophy if you suck at maths but excel at critical thinking and writing essays.

Don't arbitrarily pick a subject based on whether it's considered good or not.

Don't pick based on doing "what you love" (which will change many times through uni anyway).

Pick what you're good at.

For me this is physics - lucky me right? Wrong, physics has above average unemployment rates in the UK. I don't care, because I'm good at it. Where you fall in your class is more important than which class you take.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11652845

If your good at physics, mechanical engineering is a good way to go... Unlimited employment, and its just the application of physics. Also, there is a book I read, a while back. IT was the guide to advance math, or something like that. The first thing they said(which is true), was virtually no one is good at MATH. A few exceptions come throughout history, and we all read about them. People like Einstein for example. What sets people apart from others (in the other 99.999% of the world) is those who have the most practice at solving and evaluating problems. Basically, those who didn't just do the odd problems in the book but did all of them. A great example was my classmates from china told me that, the reason they were doing so good, in the US, was because they literally took the same exact classes in china first.

[R Smoov]

I had to switch majors from computer science to Economics. Failed so hard in my comp sci class, teacher told me to reconsider. The classes were just hard for me, especially since I used to be the best student in highschool without studying for shit. So far my cumulative gpa is about a 2.0. So now its kick ass next semester or go to the military as my mother threatened. I can't stand staying home being bitched at everyday about it.

So I'm definitely getting that book sooner or later.

[kerouac]

A great resource is linkedin!

If you go into the advanced search, and just look up a major at a certain university you're considering, and you get to see where the alumni actually headed after college.

But I'd agree with Roosh and recommend any prospective college student to get into STEM. If you want to study English Lit, there are always double majors or minors. There's no real reason anyone in their right mind should study English Lit if they don't come from a wealthy family.

[UrbanNerd]

(05-16-2012 12:40 PM)kerouac Wrote:  

A great resource is linkedin!

If you go into the advanced search, and just look up a major at a certain university you're considering, and you get to see where the alumni actually headed after college.

But I'd agree with Roosh and recommend any prospective college student to get into STEM. If you want to study English Lit, there are always double majors or minors. There's no real reason anyone in their right mind should study English Lit if they don't come from a wealthy family.

I felt that last sentence needed to be in bold.

[porscheguy]

Roosh, does the book point out how the larger colleges and universities try their hardest to encourage students to major in utterly worthless, concocted degree programs that exist only to make the college/university look more prestigious? I went to UMD for a year back in fall '97/spring '98 as a transfer student from a MD community college. I'll never forget my first meeting with a counselor back then.
me: I want a degree in criminal justice.
counselor: That's a limited enrollment program and you don't have the prerequisites.
me: OK. I want a degree in business.
counselor: Those are limited enrollment programs and you don't have the prerequisites.
me: How about a degree in Sociology/Psychology
counselor: Those are limited enrollment programs and you don't have the prerequisites.

"You don't have the prerequisites" means that you can take the prerequisites, but it may take a year or more to get them completed. Even if you're coming in with an AA in hand, they still play games and pretend you don't meet the requirements for immediate enrollment what I would label "traditional majors." If you enrolled as a freshman and knew what you wanted to do right away, it was no big deal. But they really stuck it to the transfer students.

The counselors were quick to show you all of the bullshit programs that would accept you immediately. Family studies, womyn's studies, African studies, Artisan tea brewing studies, macrame studies, etc, were all wide open and the heads of those departments were like army recruiters and used car salesmen.

Colleges and universities don't care about you. They want your money, and they care about how you make them look, and what you can do for them. By making all of the "traditional stuff" limited enrollment, the students who are really determined will stick around for the extra time (which is income for the school) to meet the prerequisites to get those degrees. Those who accept defeat and take a bullshit major, validate the existence of the major. In doing that, it boosts the image of the university because they can say "we have 600 diverse undergrad programs, so you should come here and give us your money." They don't care if the degree is worthless in terms of gainful employment.

[whitenoise]

there are no absolute rules.

yes, prospective students should think long and hard about the value of their degree and the options it gives them. that said, it all depends on your aptitude for different subjects and career aspirations. most people don't have an aptitude for hardcore quantitative material, and the majority of jobs don't require an engineering background...

[Deluge]

The issue with religiously encouraging kids to enter STEM fields is that so many just aren't interested. Also, I know so many very bright kids who took on advanced Engineering degrees and couldn't handle it. STEM is not for everybody.

[kerouac]

(05-17-2012 12:58 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

The issue with religiously encouraging kids to enter STEM fields is that so many just aren't interested. Also, I know so many very bright kids who took on advanced Engineering degrees and couldn't handle it. STEM is not for everybody.

Maybe not engineering, but something like IT is something anybody can do, and IT pays relatively well. If you don't get into engineering there are a ton of fields in the technology sector that don't require a college degree per-se but can be pursued through vocational training. Oracle Database Administrators, for instance.

IT is also something that will allow you to be location independent. Database Administrators are needed everywhere, as are people savvy with network design. A good place to get an idea of what's going on in the world of entrepreneurial nerd is http://news.ycombinator.com

[Manwhore]

Yep. Education is simply big business. They pay to advertise online to get more people to pay to submit applications than they can accept. Then offer degree programs that are WORTHLESS. A diploma is just a piece of paper that says you know how to learn. If I had to do it all over again I would get a degree in engineering.

[qazwsx]

Look at this:

https://chronicle.com/article/From-Gradu...to/131795/