What options are available for a physics graduate struggling to find a job?

In summary, the author graduated with a math degree in 2007 and worked at Walmart through a combination of expensive law school tuition, a failed family business, and not interviewing very well. The author's advice is to get a more marketable degree, stay career focused, and make use of your school's career services centre.
  • #71
G01 said:
Many people think a Physics degree means you spent four years talking about particles in a square well and twins on spaceships.

And you are implying this is not the case? Or rather you are suggesting that one should list marketable skills gained outside the curriculum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
ModusPwnd said:
And you are implying this is not the case? Or rather you are suggesting that one should list marketable skills gained outside the curriculum?

I am implying that it is not necessarily the case that a physics degree is all about twins on spaceships.

Also, The skills I mentioned can most certainly be gained from within a good physics curriculum. I learned MATLAB, Mathematica, and Java in core and cognate courses from my degree. I learned how to use oscilloscopes and lock in amplifiers during advanced lab. I learned circuit analysis from an engineering elective. I learned how to write technical papers from a required writing intensive course. During my undergrad research experience I learned LabVIEW, how to solder, and how to do basic optics alignment, and how to use an AFM and STM. I also did my fair share of twins on spaceships and particles in wells.

It's quite possible that one could go through a different physics program at a different university and not gain these skills. It could be that your university allows students freedom to ignore the courses in which one would gain these skills, or perhaps one could have professors that never considered these things important. It's also possible that students did not get sufficient research experience as an undergrad.

However all of the issues mentioned above are issues with the student, the program, or the educators, NOT the degree itself. A physics B.S. is not a free ticket to a high paying job. However, it's increasingly apparent that no college degree is. Like any other college degree it what you and your program put into it.
 
  • #73
In my experience nearly all of that is learned outside of the physics curriculum. I see what you mean by explicitly listing your skills rather than the umbrella term of "physics", particularly since most of it has nothing to do with physics but deals with STEM areas in general.

A physics BS is nothing without the student, the program, or the educators behind it so I fail to see why such a distinction should be made. I think the "issue" is with the degree itself. Its an academic degree, not technical training for a job or career. And that's ok, because we have engineering and the like for technical job and career training. One should not expect many marketable skills from any academic degree, what you should expect is to gain an esoteric knowledge base. Marketable skills have to be acquired in addition to the curriculum and in many cases, in spite of it. I know there where many times where I could have been working on my curriculum requirements of twins and particles in a box, but I was instead working on my research or TAing/Tutoring. Each of which are the only places I got marketable skills, neither of which was part of the curriculum and each competed for time and took time away from my curriculum.
 
  • #74
I agree with ModusPwnd- one of the major problems with the standard physics degree is that all of the most useful stuff is either packed into one senior lab class, or only taught as part of optional research projects, and even there it's mostly self-taught anyway. The core of what physics classes actually teach you is classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, and electrodynamics- basically "twins and infinite square wells". Very important knowledge if you eventually become a physicist, but completely useless in any other job.
 
  • #75
classical mechanics is not that useless. EM is not that bad either. parts of both classes can be reasonably applied to real life.

however QM is just totally useless the way it is taught in physics and it is basically inapplicable.
 
  • #76
chill_factor said:
classical mechanics is not that useless. EM is not that bad either. parts of both classes can be reasonably applied to real life.

however QM is just totally useless the way it is taught in physics and it is basically inapplicable.

How would you apply classical mechanics or EM to a real job situation? It's hard to think of any realistic situations(referring specifically to junior/senior level physics classes here, not the basic freshman level classes that engineers take).
 
  • #77
pi-r8 said:
How would you apply classical mechanics or EM to a real job situation? It's hard to think of any realistic situations(referring specifically to junior/senior level physics classes here, not the basic freshman level classes that engineers take).

For whatever it's worth, I have a friend who worked for a defense contractor on satellite related work. (Security clearance meant he really couldn't give details.) They hired him specifically because he had a physics background and through his physics degree learned programming and had knowledge of orbital mechanics, which he learned in an upper level mechanics class.
 
  • #78
pi-r8 said:
How would you apply classical mechanics or EM to a real job situation? It's hard to think of any realistic situations(referring specifically to junior/senior level physics classes here, not the basic freshman level classes that engineers take).

Design of specialized waveguides, modeling of peculiar magnetic materials, applying negative index metamaterials in new industrial applications, designing specialized plasma deposition systems. . .

Are those the kinds of examples you’re looking for?
 
  • #79
Locrian said:
Design of specialized waveguides, modeling of peculiar magnetic materials, applying negative index metamaterials in new industrial applications, designing specialized plasma deposition systems. . .

Are those the kinds of examples you’re looking for?

People get hired with a physics BS to do those jobs? I doubt it. Thats EE and MSEE work.
 
  • #80
ModusPwnd said:
People get hired with a physics BS to do those jobs? I doubt it. Thats EE and MSEE work.

You're wrong, Northrop Grumman mentions physicists by name when stating the degrees they hire specifically for satellite design work.
 
  • #81
ModusPwnd said:
People get hired with a physics BS to do those jobs? I doubt it. Thats EE and MSEE work.

See my above post:
G01 said:
For whatever it's worth, I have a friend who worked for a defense contractor on satellite related work. (Security clearance meant he really couldn't give details.) They hired him specifically because he had a physics background and through his physics degree learned programming and had knowledge of orbital mechanics, which he learned in an upper level mechanics class.
 
  • #82
Locrian said:
Design of specialized waveguides, modeling of peculiar magnetic materials, applying negative index metamaterials in new industrial applications, designing specialized plasma deposition systems. . .

Are those the kinds of examples you’re looking for?
None of those topics is taught in an undergrad EM class (or a grad class either, for that matter). You would need a lot of training to get from the basics taught in undergrad EM to the level of being able to design modern devices, and companies these days aren't exactly keen on paying for a new hire to take long training classes.

I searched Northrop Grumman new hires section for the keyword "physics" and couldn't find anything like this. The closest I could find was a job doing software modeling, for which they preferrede engineering degrees but "would consider" math or physics.

I don't know the details of GMs friend of course, but I think he must have been very lucky to get that job.
 
  • #83
pi-r8 said:
None of those topics is taught in an undergrad EM class (or a grad class either, for that matter). You would need a lot of training to get from the basics taught in undergrad EM to the level of being able to design modern devices, and companies these days aren't exactly keen on paying for a new hire to take long training classes.

I searched Northrop Grumman new hires section for the keyword "physics" and couldn't find anything like this. The closest I could find was a job doing software modeling, for which they preferrede engineering degrees but "would consider" math or physics.

I don't know the details of GMs friend of course, but I think he must have been very lucky to get that job.

Do engineering degrees teach you the exact topic you will work on in your job?
 
  • #84
pi-r8 said:
None of those topics is taught in an undergrad EM class (or a grad class either, for that matter).

Are you serious?? Jackson alone should get you ready to start with a few on that list, and the others can be found in elective courses.

As for undergrads, if they got a good background in E&M and took some advanced lab courses, they should be able to work in a job in those areas and pick up the specialized knowledge they need, so long as they're working with other people.

Go back and read the post I quoted to be sure you know where I'm coming from. E&M and CM provide great knowledge bases that are useful in many jobs. That's just not enough to get hired. We probably agree about the quality of the typical BS in physics. However, we definitely disagree on why the degree isn't very useful.

And I have no idea what they're teaching at your grad school.
 
  • #85
FWIW, I did see some practical stuff like transmission line theory and waveguides/resonant cavities, and antennas in a junior EM course, but it comprised of <10% of the whole syllabus. E. Engineers at my university have entire courses dedicated to these subjects.
 
  • #86
Rika said:
But I can't understand how people can be so clueless when they graduate.

How come that during those all years people:

- didn't learn any usefull skills
- didn't do any networking
- didn't do any job market research (the best quotes of this thread are question like this: "what's job market research? how do you do it?" or "what is conference?")
- didn't learn about interships

ModusPwnd said:
I was too busy doing research, keeping my GPA high, working and preparing for GREs. Y'know, the things you do in physics undergrad...

How can you be do "research," but not learn any useful skills?! If this is the case, I think you're doing "research" wrong…

Too busy? You can't spend 10 minutes going online and seeing who hires physics graduates and reading the job descriptions to see if your qualifications line up? You never thought "maybe I should get an internship"? Maybe your college's career services center sucks, but these seem like common things that every college student does. You can't be expected to be spoon-fed everything. You have to be a "self starter" and figure things out on your own.

Also, if your GPA is high, you have "research" experience, and did well on the GREs, you'll surely get into graduate school somewhere. Why are you complaining about not being prepared for industry if you're going into academia?

I don't know what all this crap is with "physics departments don't want to prepare students for industry and blah blah blah." I've studied numerous physics departments for graduate school, and I've picked up on some of their undergraduate school philosophy as well. I frequently see that departments want to prepare students for academia and industry.

To Physics B.S. holders looking for a job: Try looking into government/military labs. The military is always looking into cutting edge/obscure technology and they want physicists working on them. I did an internship in the DoD and I was told that I was hired because I was a physicist. They told me an engineer wouldn't have the background necessary.

Another good industry to check out is nanotechnology. Can't do nanotechnology without knowing quantum mechanics.

I think the greatest trait of a physicist, is their broad knowledge base. Sell this quality! Engineers (especially at the B.S. level) are specialized and don't know much outside their specialty. Ask a chemical engineer about circuits and they'll likely draw a blank. An electrical engineer how a refrigerator works? Probably have no idea. This broad knowledge base means that even if a physicist doesn't know something technical, they can probably figure out the basics in a much shorter time than an engineer.
 
  • #87
rhombusjr said:
How can you be do "research," but not learn any useful skills?! If this is the case, I think you're doing "research" wrong…

Nah, there's lots of research that's just useless. Anything that's theory and doesn't include computational work may fall into that category. My grad school roommates were great examples - non-comm geometry and string theory. They learned zero useful skills in their 7 years.
 
  • #88
Locrian said:
Nah, there's lots of research that's just useless. Anything that's theory and doesn't include computational work may fall into that category. My grad school roommates were great examples - non-comm geometry and string theory. They learned zero useful skills in their 7 years.

Exactly, a physics degree is what you make it. If you want an industry job after your degree, focus your courses around optics, lasers and electronics (which are taught in physics departments too by the way: http://physics.bu.edu/courses/schedule/371) and perhaps a computational methods course (again physics departments offer these too: http://physics.bu.edu/courses/schedule/421)

On a graduate level, if you focus your thesis work around ultrafast spectroscopy, you will be much more employable outside academia than someone who focuses their work on string theory. The degree is what you make of it, and knowing what type of job you want after its all said and done really helps.

We all agree that the standard bare minimum physics curricula do not emphasize the important industry skills as much as they should. However, Locrian is correct when he says this is not to be blamed on the subject of physics.

Also anyone who thinks that having the word "Engineering" in your degree will result in companies throwing jobs at you is sorely mistaken. I know quite a few engineers who floundered for years trying to get a job. Believe it or not what held them back was bad interview skills, lack of internships,experience and other things that were not a core requirement of their Engineering degree.
 
  • #89
rhombusjr said:
How can you be do "research," but not learn any useful skills?! If this is the case, I think you're doing "research" wrong…

Too busy? You can't spend 10 minutes going online and seeing who hires physics graduates and reading the job descriptions to see if your qualifications line up? You never thought "maybe I should get an internship"?

No, I never thought that because physics undergrads don't do internships. Physics departments and professors rarely have much in terms of industry contacts. And physics programs never organize internships. They are organized by the engineering department for engineers.

BTW, if you read carefully you will see that I was too busy to get useful marketable skills rather than doing some 10 minute search... Too busy with my physics curriculum to try crashing the engineer's party and get one of their internships.

rhombusjr said:
Also, if your GPA is high, you have "research" experience, and did well on the GREs, you'll surely get into graduate school somewhere. Why are you complaining about not being prepared for industry if you're going into academia?

Good point. Physics is academic. One shouldn't expect it to be marketable for industry.

rhombusjr said:
I don't know what all this crap is with "physics departments don't want to prepare students for industry and blah blah blah." I've studied numerous physics departments for graduate school, and I've picked up on some of their undergraduate school philosophy as well. I frequently see that departments want to prepare students for academia and industry.

Now this is confusing, because you just before this acknowledged that a physics degree is academic and doesn't prepare you for industry. Now you are claiming it does? I don't think you have your thoughts straight. Physics does not prepare you for industry, it prepares you for academia. Its not crap, that the philosophy that the departments have. Unless you are doing some type of applied physics or engineering physics... Otherwise, no, the dept does not care about industry. Nor do most of the physics students, that's why they are in physics rather than engineering...

rhombusjr said:
I think the greatest trait of a physicist, is their broad knowledge base. Sell this quality! Engineers (especially at the B.S. level) are specialized and don't know much outside their specialty. Ask a chemical engineer about circuits and they'll likely draw a blank. An electrical engineer how a refrigerator works? Probably have no idea. This broad knowledge base means that even if a physicist doesn't know something technical, they can probably figure out the basics in a much shorter time than an engineer.

I don't believe this is true at all. This is the hubris of physics. Physicists do not have a broader knowledge base than engineers. They have a more esoteric knowledge base. A chemical engineer most certainly knows a bit about circuits and an electrical engineer most certainly knows about a refrigeration. Studying physics does not make you smarter or a faster learner than an engineer.
 
  • #90
ModusPwnd said:
No, I never thought that because physics undergrads don't do internships. Physics departments and professors rarely have much in terms of industry contacts. And physics programs never organize internships. They are organized by the engineering department for engineers.

Do you really have experience with enough physics departments to make these statements or do you think you might be overgeneralizing a bit?

BTW, if you read carefully you will see that I was too busy to get useful marketable skills rather than doing some 10 minute search... Too busy with my physics curriculum to try crashing the engineer's party and get one of their internships.

This statement is patently absurd. You were so busy that you couldn't attend even one job fair, colloquium, apply for internships, or take the initiative to ask your professors for help? It is your job to network, regardless of your major.


Good point. Physics is academic. One shouldn't expect it to be marketable for industry.

Yes, physics is academic, but it can form a marketable degree with the right focus and initiative on the part of both the student and the program, as I've been describing above. I don't doubt that your program was lacking in this regard. Yet, your over-generalizations accusing all physics programs of having the same faults is uncalled for.
 
  • #91
G01 said:
Do you really have experience with enough physics departments to make these statements or do you think you might be overgeneralizing a bit?

No, I don't think I'm overgeneralizing at all. I have of course interacted with many physics majors and professors in under grad and grad school. Why not offer some counterexamples instead of unsubstantiated criticism? Which physics departments do organize industry internships? I'd love to know, I have never heard of a one. Not from my peers, not from my students and not from my professors. I did work with some chemists briefly and they did internships in their program. Physics depts resist this IME.
G01 said:
This statement is patently absurd. You were so busy that you couldn't attend even one job fair, colloquium, apply for internships, or take the initiative to ask your professors for help? It is your job to network, regardless of your major.

Thats not what I said. You are twisting my words. I attended job fairs, I attended colloquium every week. Neither of those get you marketable skills. I did not apply to any internships, I was in physics so I did undergrad research. Physics departments and professors don't organize internships. I don't know what you think asking my professors for help would do? Ask them for help in what? How to get marketable? For the most part they never had a nonacademic job. My graduate adviser was a rare one that actually did have a industry job once, he left physics for chemistry. lol


G01 said:
Yes, physics is academic, but it can form a marketable degree with the right focus and initiative on the part of both the student and the program, as I've been describing above. I don't doubt that your program was lacking in this regard. Yet, your over-generalizations accusing all physics programs of having the same faults is not called for.

I think it is called for and I don't think its an over generalization at all. You may call them faults, I think that's just the way they are. I think it might be a fault if we try to turn physics into an industry marketable degree just like engineering. Then we have two engineering degrees with different names and no academic physics degree. There is no reason to have that set up. Its good to have engineering for industry jobs and careers and physics for academic jobs and careers. Yes that means all the failed physicists will have to struggle, but that is the case for all academic degrees.

edit - Also, I don't think my undergrad program was below average at all. It was at a PAC-10 university and from my discussions with other students it was typical for the most part.
 
Last edited:
  • #92
ModusPwnd said:
Why not offer some counterexamples instead of unsubstantiated criticism?

I have offed several counter-examples, on multiple occasions in this very thread, within the past two pages. I've offered examples of physics majors getting industry positions with physics degree, for jobs where the employer preferred a physics degree: https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=4230204&postcount=77

Along the same lines, I have multiple other friends from undergrad who got internships. One turned his undergrad optics research experience into an internship at Thor Labs, which he turned into a full time position. I also have multiple other friends who were physics majors who now work for defense contractors. They cite their undergrad research (experimental) as being useful in the job application process. I think you're underselling the relevance of the research experience physics students gain, at least on the experimental side of the aisle.

I've also given examples of physics departments offering courses that do teach "marketable" skills within their course curriculum : https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=4232373&postcount=88
I did not apply to any internships, I was in physics so I did undergrad research.

Which is not necessarily a useless experience to have on an industry resume, depending on the research topic. See above.

Physics departments and professors don't organize internships. I don't know what you think asking my professors for help would do? Ask them for help in what? How to get marketable? For the most part they never had a nonacademic job. My graduate adviser was a rare one that actually did have a industry job once, he left physics for chemistry.

Your professors work in academia. However they have met people or gone to school with people who have left and got industry jobs. They also almost certainly have connections that a student does not. Networking is as important to a successful career as well. Even in the sciences, it can boil down to "who you know" as well as "what you know."


I think it is called for and I don't think its an over generalization at all. You may call them faults, I think that's just the way they are. I think it might be a fault if we try to turn physics into an industry marketable degree just like engineering. Then we have two engineering degrees with different names and no academic physics degree.

I do agree with you here. However, I think there is a difference between turning a physics degree into an engineering degree and offering students a curriculum that is flexible and prepares students for careers other than academic research. My program did, and we were better off for it, even those of us who decided to go the academic route.
Also, I don't think my undergrad program was below average at all. It was at a PAC-10 university and from my discussions with other students it was typical for the most part.

I'm sure your experience was typical. I disagree that this is the way it should be though. There is a middle ground between completely academic, esoteric physics curricula and turning physics into an engineering degree.
 
  • #93
I really want to stay out of the debate here and hopefully get back to the OP, I'm an EE but wanted to relay back the many non-traditional opportunities I have seen phys grads - technical field services, financal analysist, insurance investigators, and a number of them are in the renewables market. Rarely will they say they are looking for physics but the degree shows the ability to approach things tecnically and analytically.
Also get on linked-in and network.
But aways be working and if you can do some vounteer work, it can go on the resume.
 
  • #94
ModusPwnd said:
No, I never thought that because physics undergrads don't do internships. Physics departments and professors rarely have much in terms of industry contacts. And physics programs never organize internships. They are organized by the engineering department for engineers.

Really, Where are you pulling this information from?

I do theoretical condensed matter and know professors including my advisor with contacts in finance/ Oil companies / national labs and NASA and other experimental professors who own companies or are founders of startups in nano tech. These contacts include former students who have went to work in these other industries.

The same I could of said of undergrad institute professors

And as a physics BS before grad school I worked or interviewed at
Music Software Start up
Foreclosure/Real Estate software company
Online Ad company
Financial software company
Defense contractors

Although some of those jobs didnt have "physics" in the job description/ad. I realized I had the skills to do them so I applied and framed my skill set to apply what the job role is.
 
  • #95
G01 said:
Your professors work in academia. However they have met people or gone to school with people who have left and got industry jobs. They also almost certainly have connections that a student does not. Networking is as important to a successful career as well. Even in the sciences, it can boil down to "who you know" as well as "what you know."
Its impossible to not make contacts. In any PhD granting institution professors are advising students of which about half are going into industry (AIP statistics) therefore half their students become viable industry contacts. This is assuming they arent networking other places like conferences ie the assumption of professors in a bubble composed of only themselves and their grad students.
 
  • #96
Locrian said:
Nah, there's lots of research that's just useless. Anything that's theory and doesn't include computational work may fall into that category. My grad school roommates were great examples - non-comm geometry and string theory. They learned zero useful skills in their 7 years.
So being good at math is not marketable? Then how do math BS graduates get jobs? Why do financial companies hire math majors for internships and full-time jobs, even those with no computational or finance knowledge? I know that the NSA specifically hires mathematicians who study pure subjects such as algebra and number theory.

ModusPwnd said:
…physics undergrads don't do internships. Physics departments and professors rarely have much in terms of industry contacts. And physics programs never organize internships. They are organized by the engineering department for engineers.
This is not true. I reply to this with something that I already said:
rhombusjr said:
I did an internship in the DoD and I was told that I was hired because I was a physicist. They told me an engineer wouldn't have the background necessary.
I wasn't working on something esoteric like loop quantum gravity, I was working on fielded technologies with direct impact to the US military. They wanted a physicist and not an engineer for the job. Physics majors do do internships, just maybe not the ones at your school. At my school, nearly every physics major has done some kind of internship in industry. Most of these internships were organized by the department. This is what I meant before when I said that physics departments don't only care about academia and that they are aware that some students want to enter industry. Their focus is on academia, but they don't completely throw industry out the window.

I do think that physicists have a broader knowledge base than the typical engineer (my employers at the DoD also thought so, that's why I was hired). Show me where in the standard EE curriculum students take a course in thermodynamics or rigid body mechanics. Physicists are simply exposed to more subjects than most engineers are.

It's important not to confuse "you can market a physics degree to get a technical job" with "any physicist is qualified for every single technical job out there". A physicist getting an industry job depends on both the skills of the physicist and the requirements of the job. Some jobs (like mine at the DoD) only need the broad knowledge base of a physicist, some require more specific knowledge. Physics is a very broad discipline and you can't expect to be spoon-fed everything you need for a particular industry job. Saying physics can be marketable, doesn't mean that a physics degree is ready made for industry. If you're trying to get a specific industry job, it's up to you to go beyond the bare minimum and gain that specific skill set.

If you're intentionally training to enter academia and not industry (doing research instead of internships, studying for stdzd tests instead of reading job postings, etc.) then you shouldn't be complaining you're underprepared to enter industry. If you were training to run marathons, would you complain about being a poor swimmer? It is possible to do both BTW. I did research and industry internships. It's not that hard to do; it's not an either/or situation.

My point here is to say that a physicist can get an industry job (since this is the problem faced by the OP). I will concede that if you want the most marketable degree, there are better options than physics (which is not the topic of this thread).

Off the top of my head, here are some jobs that make use of "esoteric" physics topics like quantum mechanics and relativity: medical imaging, GPS satellite design, semiconductor development/manufacturing, nanotechnology development.
 
  • #97
rhombusjr said:
So being good at math is not marketable?

By itself? Not really. You'll want some programming, statistics, data mining, etc. experience, too. It's hard not to get some useful skills studying math, but there are areas of physics (and math!) that somehow manage it.
 
  • #98
rhombusjr said:
So being good at math is not marketable? Then how do math BS graduates get jobs? Why do financial companies hire math majors for internships and full-time jobs, even those with no computational or finance knowledge?

I'm a math major. I've worked in software development & moved to consulting.

You need to market yourself in the job market as a 'problem solver', and a very good one. People with math degrees tend to be very smart & they tend to progress fast.

And they can provide solutions to finance problems (ie business problems) in ways the accounting grads can't.
 
  • #99
rhombusjr said:
So being good at math is not marketable? Then how do math BS graduates get jobs? Why do financial companies hire math majors for internships and full-time jobs, even those with no computational or finance knowledge? I know that the NSA specifically hires mathematicians who study pure subjects such as algebra and number theory.

Being good at math alone won't really help but it won't hurt either. Something that was always stressed when I was an undergrad was gaining at least basic CS skills, which is why the first discrete math class had some programming assignments within it even though it wasn't the main focus. I do know a couple of math undergrads that got into NSA or NSA-type jobs and they were no chumps when it came to CS stuff, they knew CS (algorithms, computation theory, etc) just as well as they knew math.

I hope you aren't implying that finance, NSA, or whatever hires math majors just because they know math. Math and physics will always need some sort of platform to do their work in industry, on the theory side it's CS and on the experimental side it's engineering/lab work.
 
  • #100
SophusLies said:
I hope you aren't implying that finance, NSA, or whatever hires math majors just because they know math. Math and physics will always need some sort of platform to do their work in industry, on the theory side it's CS and on the experimental side it's engineering/lab work.

You are correct. I was merely trying to indicate that being good at math is not a completely useless skill w.r.t. industry. The job applicants with a stronger CS background were probably first pick, but the ones with only string math credentials probably weren't thrown out right off the bat either.

Math is a marketable skill, but it still is only one skill. Having only one marketable skill is seldom enough to land a job (unless that job only uses that one skill). You can be a master welder, but if the job calls for someone who can also operate a lathe, someone who only knows how to weld isn't likely to get the job.
 
  • #101
SophusLies said:
I hope you aren't implying that finance, NSA, or whatever hires math majors just because they know math. Math and physics will always need some sort of platform to do their work in industry, on the theory side it's CS and on the experimental side it's engineering/lab work.
Being a good interviewee or job searcher is about learning to market yourself so that your resume and general pitch is more than "i know math".
 
  • #102
ModusPwnd said:
I don't believe this is true at all. This is the hubris of physics. Physicists do not have a broader knowledge base than engineers.

Having done both degrees, I can say you're wrong here.
 
  • #103
clope023 said:
Having done both degrees, I can say you're wrong here.

Makes sense given the fact that the whole point of starting engineering programs/degrees is to specialize to prepare for a specific sets of jobs. How could that possibly lead to a broader knowledge base.
 
  • #104
jesse73 said:
Makes sense given the fact that the whole point of starting engineering programs/degrees is to specialize to prepare for a specific sets of jobs. How could that possibly lead to a broader knowledge base.

Because the job requires a broader knowledge base than being a grad student does. Engineering degrees have requirements that span scientific theory as well as industrial application. They have programming requirements and they even have requirements of business/economics classes. A physics BS is nearly all scientific theory. It's more specialized and narrow. Since engineering is tailored for a 'real world' job, its has to span the many areas that a real world job requires. Being insulated in academia one doesn't need such a broad base.
 
  • #105
Personally I do not believe that good employers expect new graduates to really KNOW anything relevant to their business - it is their general foundation of knowledge and ability to learn and understand complex, technical and mathematical concepts that makes them valuable. When we turn a college education into a trade school - with expectation that if you complete X degree you will then get a job doing Y - we lead the students astray - but in our "$ are all that matters society" - this true value gets lost.
We can not and should not expect a 19 yr old to know what they want to do for their whole lives, but we should encourage and show them that a challenging and "show me your best" education - is always better than a skill set.
 
<h2>1. What types of jobs can a physics graduate pursue?</h2><p>A physics graduate can pursue a variety of careers, including research and development, data analysis, teaching, engineering, and consulting.</p><h2>2. What industries typically hire physics graduates?</h2><p>Physics graduates can find job opportunities in a wide range of industries, such as aerospace, energy, healthcare, technology, and finance.</p><h2>3. What skills do employers look for in physics graduates?</h2><p>Employers often seek out physics graduates with strong analytical and problem-solving skills, as well as proficiency in data analysis, programming, and critical thinking.</p><h2>4. Are there any additional qualifications or certifications that can improve job prospects for a physics graduate?</h2><p>Obtaining additional qualifications or certifications, such as a Master's degree or professional certifications in a specific field, can enhance job prospects for a physics graduate.</p><h2>5. What resources are available for a physics graduate looking for job opportunities?</h2><p>There are various resources available for physics graduates, including job search websites, career fairs, networking events, and career counseling services offered by universities or professional organizations.</p>

1. What types of jobs can a physics graduate pursue?

A physics graduate can pursue a variety of careers, including research and development, data analysis, teaching, engineering, and consulting.

2. What industries typically hire physics graduates?

Physics graduates can find job opportunities in a wide range of industries, such as aerospace, energy, healthcare, technology, and finance.

3. What skills do employers look for in physics graduates?

Employers often seek out physics graduates with strong analytical and problem-solving skills, as well as proficiency in data analysis, programming, and critical thinking.

4. Are there any additional qualifications or certifications that can improve job prospects for a physics graduate?

Obtaining additional qualifications or certifications, such as a Master's degree or professional certifications in a specific field, can enhance job prospects for a physics graduate.

5. What resources are available for a physics graduate looking for job opportunities?

There are various resources available for physics graduates, including job search websites, career fairs, networking events, and career counseling services offered by universities or professional organizations.

Similar threads

  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
462
  • STEM Career Guidance
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
25
Views
3K
Back
Top