What field would you actually encourage someone to pursue?

[mal4mac]

A few of those have degree programs specifically designed for those jobs like engineering and IT and it seems a little dismissive to those specializations to believe that one deserves a job in those fields despite the fact that there already is a big supply of people specifically preparing for those jobs.

There might be a "big supply", whatever that means, but that still doesn't mean there are enough people specifically preparing for those jobs. From being someone with a physics degree, and no University IT qualifications, all I can say is that I found it easy to get such jobs in the University sector. In fact, most lecturers in IT, convert to it from another field. And no one is dismissive of the IT specialization. It's just employers are faced with a range of candidates and "physics degree + appropriate IT work experience" is likely to trump "IT degree", in many cases. And it's ridiculous to say a physics graduate doesn't deserve a job in the field. They have shown their ability to handle complex technical material, and probably have some programming experience, so why don't they deserve IT? (Scuse pun.... The jobs are going begging so who should get the job? The high school drop out or the physics graduate? (Please don't say your IT person is a high school drop out - as I said there are *many* jobs in this area, a bun feast for all...)

 

[JakeBrodskyPE]

There are two hurdles to overcome when marketing your skills as a generalist:

First, there are very few formal employment opportunities that actually expect generalists. This is an outcome of the bureaucratic monster that was created when businesses responded to a slew of legal precedents and legislation, creating Human Resource bureaucracies in lieu of the personnel clerks. Bureaucracies are not good at dealing with a wide range of skills, technologies, and concepts. They prefer nice, neat people units, with nice, neat certifications, to be applied to nice neat pigeon-hole jobs they can document and justify. Thus, instead of generalists being able to apply for a job, requirements get very specialized and inviolate. That degree in mathematics that might have earned you work with an Engineering Department from generations past is almost impossible with today's HR bureaucracy.

Second, Mathematicians and Physicists tend to gloss over the details that Engineers study to get their work done in a timely fashion. There are phenomena that aren't commonly taught in physics classes, such as incompressible fluid dynamics at Froude numbers near 1. Another example is, instead of figuring out the Bessel polynomial roots to work out the translations of a first sideband null to a frequency modulation index, most RF engineers have a nice short formula to relate the null points, modulation frequencies and modulation indices. I could go on like this. The bottom line is that where a Physicist or Mathematician might swirl around a problem for many hours, the Engineers have a working group of approximations, practices, and experience that save significant time over what a generalist would have to learn.

A generalist can figure this out, just as a high school graduate with reasonable arithmetic skills could figure out book keeping and accounting practices. But there is a significant additional learning curve that you'll have to overcome. That's the reality.

I wish we could return to the simpler employment practices that I used to see when I was first employed, but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

 

[Ophiolite]

That seems to me to be a slightly uncharitable reading of my post: I was talking about possible degree options.

But, you have a daughter and I have no children, so my opinion might well be platitudinous nonsense all the same.

I have children. Your advice was not platitudinous.

The question is, do you measure success by your income? If one does, then roll the dice and hope you make a good prediction of the skill set that will be in demand when you graduate. Alternatively, pursue what interests you. That way, even the pay sucks, you'll be enjoying yourself. And isn't that a better goal than being rich?

 

[StatGuy2000]

There are two hurdles to overcome when marketing your skills as a generalist:

First, there are very few formal employment opportunities that actually expect generalists. This is an outcome of the bureaucratic monster that was created when businesses responded to a slew of legal precedents and legislation, creating Human Resource bureaucracies in lieu of the personnel clerks. Bureaucracies are not good at dealing with a wide range of skills, technologies, and concepts. They prefer nice, neat people units, with nice, neat certifications, to be applied to nice neat pigeon-hole jobs they can document and justify. Thus, instead of generalists being able to apply for a job, requirements get very specialized and inviolate. That degree in mathematics that might have earned you work with an Engineering Department from generations past is almost impossible with today's HR bureaucracy.

Second, Mathematicians and Physicists tend to gloss over the details that Engineers study to get their work done in a timely fashion. There are phenomena that aren't commonly taught in physics classes, such as incompressible fluid dynamics at Froude numbers near 1. Another example is, instead of figuring out the Bessel polynomial roots to work out the translations of a first sideband null to a frequency modulation index, most RF engineers have a nice short formula to relate the null points, modulation frequencies and modulation indices. I could go on like this. The bottom line is that where a Physicist or Mathematician might swirl around a problem for many hours, the Engineers have a working group of approximations, practices, and experience that save significant time over what a generalist would have to learn.

A generalist can figure this out, just as a high school graduate with reasonable arithmetic skills could figure out book keeping and accounting practices. But there is a significant additional learning curve that you'll have to overcome. That's the reality.

I wish we could return to the simpler employment practices that I used to see when I was first employed, but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

From your above description, you would then concede that you would not encourage your children to pursue a degree in mathematics or physics then i.e. math and physics degrees are simply not worth it for employment purposes (unless it involves either a double major or minor with computer science, or it involves applied math/statistics)?

 

[JakeBrodskyPE]

From your above description, you would then concede that you would not encourage your children to pursue a degree in mathematics or physics then i.e. math and physics degrees are simply not worth it for employment purposes (unless it involves either a double major or minor with computer science, or it involves applied math/statistics)?

First, I'm not convinced that anything beyond a four year degree is worth the investment. Even a four year degree can be ridiculously expensive.

Second, we have a surplus of white collar workers and a dearth of blue collar workers. If my children chose to pick up a trade instead of going to school, I will support them just as much as I would if they were to go to college. I won't encourage one thing over another. This is their career decision, after all.

One thing I have learned as a parent is that if your son or daughter has made up their mind, there is very little you can say or do to change it. Most parents support and nudge their teens toward generally more productive endeavors. If my son or daughters chose to study English, Philosophy, Mathematics, Physics, or History, I will encourage them to make plans for what they will do when they get out of college (or how to stay in college as a professor). But I won't insist that they head toward any profession that I may choose.

Because of all the overhead and foolishness that Employment Policy and Law have foisted on larger businesses we may see a resurgence of smaller professional businesses. That generalist degree may actually help in situations like that.

In any case, I won't discourage them from wanting to fill an intellectual void, but I will point out that my wife and I do not have the financial resources to support them through a post-graduate education. There has to be some consideration for how they're going to earn their keep.

 

[Locrian]

The question is, do you measure success by your income? If one does, then roll the dice and hope you make a good prediction of the skill set that will be in demand when you graduate. Alternatively, pursue what interests you. That way, even the pay sucks, you'll be enjoying yourself.

There are lots of posters here who pursued what interested them, but who aren't enjoying themselves because there's no opportunity to work in the area they studied.

The "money or passion" dichotomy we so often see presented here doesn't describe the situation most people are actually encountering.

 

[jkl71]

There are lots of posters here who pursued what interested them, but who aren't enjoying themselves because there's no opportunity to work in the area they studied.

The "money or passion" dichotomy we so often see presented here doesn't describe the situation most people are actually encountering.

I agree, loved doing physics, and if I could get a job doing the kind of research I did in grad school I'd willing take a big pay cut. For most it's more like follow your passion for awhile then figure out what to do later. This can be frustrating when you know there are other things you'd rather be doing and that you're actually better at, still I don't regret it because I really liked doing physics while I was doing it.

As a rule of thumb my suggestion is, if you feel compelled to do physics then do it and enjoy it while you're doing it, but if you are considering physics and something else go for the something else.

In terms of positive suggestions, many different areas of IT seems pretty good right now. I don't have first hand knowledge, but from what I hear engineering also has strong demand.

 

[jasonRF]

The answer is so specialized to an individuals strengths/weaknesses/personality/etc. that no general answer can be made. On a more personal level I just know that I want each of my kids to be able to earn an acceptable living (ie not have to live with me forever!) and be happy. This could mean as a teacher, or doctor, or machinist, or pastor, etc. I will try to guide them when they have choices, the same way my parents did, but it will be their lives. I'm sure I will be more conflicted when they are ready to choose post-high school plans, but this is my current thinking.

jason

 

[bhobba]

I'd say a math degree doesn't really prepare you for anything specifically. Rather, it's a solid "generalist" education - a good starting point for many paths. Nothing wrong with that, but from what I've observed, hiring managers aren't looking for generalists.

Sorry for not being clear - it was preparation for future study that will lead to a specific qualification. For example a math degree provides suitable background for undertaking post graduate actuarial studies. A degree in English, for example, wouldn't; unless you took a significant amount of math.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

I found my programming skills eminently transferable from language to language as the field evolved, a "for loop" is much the same in any language. The new stuff ("objects", "patterns", etc...) are easy to keep up with. With a little experience under your belt experience you can easily retrain yourself, and it's all on the web for free these days.

I worked as an application programmer for 30 years and that is indeed true. But remove yourself from doing it for a few years (say to do management, DBA work or networking) and quite possibly things could have changed so that you will require a bit of time to come up to speed. When hiring people, and this is something I have done, those with current skills generally get the nod. I have even seen people hired based of their very extensive decades experience programming but because they have been managing for a few years were slow to get up to speed again and were sacked because of it. I most definitely did NOT agree with the managers that did that, who I felt were simply trying to earn brownie points with their superiors - but that's the type of rubbish that goes on.

Also, if you work in the public sector your IT management jobs is as safe, & at least as well paid as that of a tenured physics lecturer (in the UK at least...) Also jobs in the publuic sector are easy to get 'cause most IT experts want bigger money (!)

I worked as an application programmer for over 30 years in the public sector - with nearly 20 years at the team leader level - although my early years were pretty dull, working with key operators keying in payment slips and balancing them against the systems outputs while I did my degree part time.

While public sector jobs are certainly safer than private sector ones, and you are generally paid less because of it, every now and then you have these 'purges' where some upper level person in the SES (Senior Executive Service), quite likely under political direction to outsource or something like that that, decides people have to go. For people at Team Leader level etc its generally a non issue because usually there are contractors there and they go first - but management is another matter - they are almost invariably in-house and out they go. Although in my experience wherever I have seen it applied a couple of years later you have more managers than before because the new direction was a total failure and the SES people along with their political masters have moved on.

Thanks
Bill

 

[jesse73]

Banks are too big to fail so I would recommend working for them.

 

[Locrian]

Banks have been shedding jobs by the thousands for years. In general I would not recommend working for them.

 

[ZapperZ]

Hi everyone. One of the dominant themes that come up in the Career Guidance section of Physics Forums is the relentless pessimism and negativity about the job market in the US. Specifically, that of the employment prospects for physics majors (whether at the undergraduate or at the PhD level), and how a physics degree leaves graduates unprepared for the job market.

Let me turn this theme around. Suppose someone who is either graduating from high school or who is currently a freshman in college/university asked any of you what field/career/job is the most promising, based on current and future prospects. What would be your answer? What field would you encourage someone to pursue, based on two criteria:

(1) Current demand in the US,

and

(2) Future demand in the US, say 5-10 years from now (this is tricky since the economy can change dramatically, but assume for the moment that the American economy that time is not too different from the current economy now)

Also, please note that I'm not just looking at STEM fields, but all fields, in anything, including those that don't necessarily require a university/college education. Anything that is well-paid or promises a decent, middle-class lifestyle or above.

Have you looked at this:?

http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/Unemployment.Final.update1.pdf

Zz.

 

[caldweab]

I think this is a great question. It's easy to point out flaws in any career field (especially when you're trying to make forecasts about the future), but at the end of the day you have to pick *some* field to pursue. Or at least to study in college.
Here some of my suggestions.
1) Strong science student, and highly motivated? Go to medical school and become a doctor (note that *any major* can go to medical school). After you finish(in about half the time it takes for a PhD!), you have the closest thing possible to a guaranteed job, at a high salary, because a strong industry group (the American Medical Association) limits the supply. Some specialties can become *very* rich, but all doctors earn at least a pretty good salary. At the same time, people will treat you like a hero, and you'll have the satisfaction of healing people. If you get tired of the stress, just save aggressively and you can retire in your 30s.
2)Same as above, but need to make money right out of college? Go to *specific* engineering fields. Right now Petroleum and Chemical engineers seem to be making 6 figure salaries right out of college. The downside is that the market seems to change very quickly,and if you're niche falls out of favor it will be hard to switch to a different type of engineering. Many people also find this work very interesting and helpful to society (not me though).
3) Otherwise, if you're at least decent at math, and school in general, learn programming. It doesn't matter what your major is (although computer science does help), if you can demonstrate proficiency there's a huge range of jobs to be had here. And, if you start as a programmer but decide you don't like it, there's a huge range of jobs you can transition into later. If you decide that you really want to go into research, this is an incredibly useful skill to have. There's also tons of opportunity to start your own business.
4) If for whatever reason you can't finish college, look to the skilled trades. It can be a bit hard to get a union to accept you, but once your in you'll be very secure financially, and have the satisfaction of building something useful with your own hands.
5) Economics. I'll let this explain why: http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/if-you-get-phd-get-economics-phd.html
6) "Niche" jobs. Here I mean the obscure jobs that you've never heard of because few people do them, and there's no formal path to entering them. Usually you have to know someone who's hiring for one of these, or be already working at a company that needs one. But I've noticed a lot of people have good jobs of this sort, which they had never even imagined as a student. This thread has some good examples of what I mean.

Engineering not helpful to society? Who do you think designed and built literally everything use everyday? A physicist or mathematician? No engineers!

 

[jesse73]

Banks have been shedding jobs by the thousands for years. In general I would not recommend working for them.

That doesn't account for which part of the banks are shedding jobs. As someone has said pharma/bio shed the sales job before engineering. The shedding in banks is probably not even across sectors. I imagine it is harder to replace PhD jobs in quantitative parts of the company than a teller at a branch.

 

[Locrian]

It's been hard in all areas. Banks don't hire any significant number of PhD's anyways.

In any case, the point is that being "too big to fail" (assuming that phrase has any meaning at all), hasn't saved tens of thousands of people from being laid off, so readers should look carefully before choosing that sector.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Have you looked at this:?

http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/Unemployment.Final.update1.pdf

Zz.

Sorry for my late response, but I did look at the article. Two things struck me:

(1) According to the article, the unemployment rate for graduate holders in physics is 2.8%, which is the highest rate among graduate holders among all of the sciences, although the percentage is still small. However, given the posts here on PF where many physics PhDs often leave science entirely, I'm wondering if the unemployment rate is underreported.

(2) For engineering specialties, civil engineers report the highest unemployment for recent graduates at 8.1% but the lowest unemployment for graduate holders at 2.8%. Interestingly enough, graduate holders of engineering degrees all report higher unemployment rates than graduate holders in the sciences, which strike me as being counterintuitive.

 

[JakeBrodskyPE]

Sorry for my late response, but I did look at the article. Two things struck me:

(1) According to the article, the unemployment rate for graduate holders in physics is 2.8%, which is the highest rate among graduate holders among all of the sciences, although the percentage is still small. However, given the posts here on PF where many physics PhDs often leave science entirely, I'm wondering if the unemployment rate is underreported.

(2) For engineering specialties, civil engineers report the highest unemployment for recent graduates at 8.1% but the lowest unemployment for graduate holders at 2.8%. Interestingly enough, graduate holders of engineering degrees all report higher unemployment rates than graduate holders in the sciences, which strike me as being counterintuitive.

In addition, if you read the methodology section in the last part of the report you'll notice that they only looked at unemployment rates compared to each major. They do not say whether the employment has anything relevant to do with the major. The question of whether one will get work doing anything remotely associated with the degree of study is still a valid concern and a source of much angst and confusion.

 

[StatGuy2000]

In addition, if you read the methodology section in the last part of the report you'll notice that they only looked at unemployment rates compared to each major. They do not say whether the employment has anything relevant to do with the major. The question of whether one will get work doing anything remotely associated with the degree of study is still a valid concern and a source of much angst and confusion.

A valid point, and a point of concern for determining what field one should consider pursuing.

 

[StatGuy2000]

I thought to revive this thread again, nearly seven months after I had initially started it, to see if others have any fresh perspectives on the question I had posed. Any further thoughts?

 

[Locrian]

I think certified medical coding has a lot of opportunities. Not as an endgame job (though it can be lucrative), but as a stepping stone to lots of other places (that would still utilize that designation). Think CMC + data science, or CMC + health administration, etc. It would be the first (valuable) block in an extended career.

I think in the US, just about any medical path can be rewarding, IF done without accumulating too much debt. The most obvious way to do this is through the military, but there are other routes, too.

 

[analogdesign]

Sorry for my late response, but I did look at the article. Two things struck me:

(2) For engineering specialties, civil engineers report the highest unemployment for recent graduates at 8.1% but the lowest unemployment for graduate holders at 2.8%. Interestingly enough, graduate holders of engineering degrees all report higher unemployment rates than graduate holders in the sciences, which strike me as being counterintuitive.

As Jake said, the percentage of Engineers who "have a job" may not be terrible, but the percentage who get to work as engineers is declining. For instance, the number of Electrical Engineers in the United States has declined by roughly 20% in the last decade (even with all the new graduates).

http://www.computerworld.com/articl...l-engineering-lost-35-000-jobs-last-year.html

I'm not surprised. For the last 10 years or so it has been tough to get entry-level work in EE as companies continue to move toward becoming marketing organizations...

 

[StatGuy2000]

As Jake said, the percentage of Engineers who "have a job" may not be terrible, but the percentage who get to work as engineers is declining. For instance, the number of Electrical Engineers in the United States has declined by roughly 20% in the last decade (even with all the new graduates).

http://www.computerworld.com/articl...l-engineering-lost-35-000-jobs-last-year.html

I'm not surprised. For the last 10 years or so it has been tough to get entry-level work in EE as companies continue to move toward becoming marketing organizations...

analogdesign, I think you can conclude from the above link that within the US, EE positions have been tough to break into at entry level, and therefore you would discourage someone from entering that field. So my question specifically to you (and only you) would be -- what field (any field) would you actually encourage someone from the US, say graduating from high school and/or considering college/university/post-secondary training, to pursue?

 

[analogdesign]

analogdesign, I think you can conclude from the above link that within the US, EE positions have been tough to break into at entry level, and therefore you would discourage someone from entering that field. So my question specifically to you (and only you) would be -- what field (any field) would you actually encourage someone from the US, say graduating from high school and/or considering college/university/post-secondary training, to pursue?

I discussed this with my wife who works at a University Hospital. She had an interesting perspective, based on her observations both in the hospital and among our friends/peer group. She thinks (and I agree) that Medical Technologist is a very promising field. These are good paying jobs such as X-Ray or Radiology Tech. They don't require an engineering degree and can make $30/hr or more. The field is growing and many medical systems are actually *reducing* their automation because (I presume) of liability issues. The good part about these jobs is that you don't have to go into crushing 6-figure debt to obtain them, and there isn't as much pressure on wages as there is for physicians. My wife also thinks skilled labor jobs (such as plumber, HVAC tech, etc) are good bang for the buck. I'm less sanguine about those because of wage pressure from anti-union policies.

Therefore, I would specifically encourage someone to look into becoming a medical technician. These jobs have a good salary, good working conditions, low or no debt is required to enter the profession, and they are reasonably future-proof. I wouldn't necessarily discourage a passionate student to go into engineering. There will always be engineering jobs available, but over time I suspect the current trend of declining opportunity and increased competition will continue. It's also a pretty brutal job unless you're lucky to get in with a good organization (that is getting harder and harder to do).

There has been a chill wind blowing in the USA for at least the last 30 years. It's hard to think of a profession that *isn't* under some kind of pressure. It's small wonder the real, inflation-adjusted median household income of Americans peaked in the late 90s and is currently at about the same level it was 20 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

My concern about many professions is the high level of debt required for school. I have a friend who is a Psychiatrist and she has over $200k of debt! She makes a good living but that brick around her neck is very tough to deal with.

Another trend is for MS students in engineering at least to pay for school. This was almost unheard of when I was in college 20 years ago but at least at my college most MS students pay tuition and not even every PhD student gets a teaching or research assistant position. It is a combination of reduced public support (so the colleges have less funding) and increased demand (the colleges can get away with charging now because so many people are desperate for a credential).

 

[StatGuy2000]

There has been a chill wind blowing in the USA for at least the last 30 years. It's hard to think of a profession that *isn't* under some kind of pressure. It's small wonder the real, inflation-adjusted median household income of Americans peaked in the late 90s and is currently at about the same level it was 20 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

My concern about many professions is the high level of debt required for school. I have a friend who is a Psychiatrist and she has over $200k of debt! She makes a good living but that brick around her neck is very tough to deal with.

Another trend is for MS students in engineering at least to pay for school. This was almost unheard of when I was in college 20 years ago but at least at my college most MS students pay tuition and not even every PhD student gets a teaching or research assistant position. It is a combination of reduced public support (so the colleges have less funding) and increased demand (the colleges can get away with charging now because so many people are desperate for a credential).

This is somewhat unrelated to my original thread, but here is an article related to the global rankings on social progress. You can make of this as you will.

http://www.salon.com/2014/04/09/global_rankings_study_america_in_warp_speed_decline_partner

 

[jtbell]

This thread has strayed far from the original topic, indeed the general area of this forum. It is now closed, pending discussion among the Mentors about what to do with it.

 

[Evo]

The recent posts have been moved to a new thread. https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/economic-trends-in-the-us.774852/

 

[jtbell]

OK, now let's see if you all can continue along the original path, in this thread.

 

[zoki85]

Demand for engineering design and engineering production will probably vary depending on which field of engineering. For example, there probably would be less demand for civil engineers specializing in structural engineering design (given the continuing weakness of the housing/construction sector) versus, say, electrical engineering design.

Wishful dreaming where I live.
_{+ your post made me sad...}

 

[td21]

My dream is to be a physicist and i am going to apply for physics phd for the third attempt.