Business Insider's 10 most useless graduate degrees

[CFBrown]

Came across this on Facebook tonight and my thoughts were:

 

1. Does "public relations" count as communications and mass media?
2. I see a lot of users on GradCafe who declare these majors...

How much does this article give you second thoughts on pursuing your master's, if any? What do you think of the list overall?

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-10-most-useless-graduate-degrees-2015-2?utm_content=fbboost&utm_medium=cpm&utm_source=facebook.com&

[nugget]

I think it's ridiculous for the author to suggest that a $10,000 or $15,000 salary increase is insignificant, particularly when some of the salaries are in the $40-60,000 range. Multiply this amount by 30 or 40 years and the numbers will add up quickly, even as much as half a million dollars before taxes. This is easily the cost of a house for some.

 

Money also isn't everything. Plenty of wealthy people have been unhappy, depressed, or in some unfortunate situations, even committed suicide. Clearly their wealth did not help them out much. There is no point in pursuing a field of study simply because it pays well if one is miserable doing that line of work or at the expense of ones' dreams, IMO. 

Edited March 1, 2015 by jenste

[shadowclaw]

That's an interesting look at average salaries. However, I think they are overlooking exactly what it means to be experienced. I know someone in computer science. Straight out of undergrad, he could have taken a job that paid $40k and maybe after 5 years, he could have been making $60k if he played his cards right. He's about to get his PhD and has job offers for over $100k. That's quite a difference. Sure, I guess eventually the two salaries will be closer together with experience, but that could take a long time. Even just a few years with a disparity of $40k will make a huge difference.

Plus, like the above poster mentioned, a $10-15k difference can be huge. For example, my brother makes somewhere in the 40's and his wife worked at a department store making around 20k. She hurt her back and stopped working. They couldn't make it on his salary alone, so he started working a second job part-time making maybe $10k. That made a huge difference.

I also agree that money isn't everything. Some things require a higher degree even if they don't pay that well, but if it makes you happy and you can still eat and have a roof over your head, you should go for it.

Also, communications is a crummy field to pursue IMO, undergraduate or otherwise. When I was a freshman, half of the incoming students majored in communications. There just aren't enough jobs for all of those majors. One of my brothers got a degree in communications from a very prestigious school (and did well), and his job has nothing to do with his major, plus the pay isn't very good. He even had to work in fast food management for several years before finding it. Meanwhile, my brother who majored in accounting at a state school and then got his MBA on his employer's dime makes over $250k as a pharmaceutical sales rep.

Edited March 1, 2015 by shadowclaw

[Cheshire_Cat]

You also have to consider the opportunity costs of being a full time student instead of employed.  So for instance, if your master's degree takes two years full time and is in CS, then you also have to take that 93k*2 and add that as a cost of being in school.  Then for a 14k increase in salary,  you are looking at 186k+ tuition as the total cost of the degree.  That means it will take you at least 13 years to recoup from your investment.  It may still be worth it for other, non-monetary reasons, but that kind of gives you an idea of why BI may say it is useless.

[HistoryGypsy]

Wahoo!  My field didn't make the list!    

[shadowclaw]

You also have to consider the opportunity costs of being a full time student instead of employed. So for instance, if your master's degree takes two years full time and is in CS, then you also have to take that 93k*2 and add that as a cost of being in school. Then for a 14k increase in salary, you are looking at 186k+ tuition as the total cost of the degree. That means it will take you at least 13 years to recoup from your investment. It may still be worth it for other, non-monetary reasons, but that kind of gives you an idea of why BI may say it is useless.

You're forgetting that those averages salaries are for experienced graduates, not those fresh out of school. A CS major isn't going to make $93k fresh out of undergrad. According to Payscale.com, the average starting salary with a BS is $57k to 61k (depending on experience through internships). It takes 10+ years to reach that 93k figure. Someone with an MS starts anywhere from $68 to $79k, which I feel is a substantial difference.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Bachelor_of_Science_(BS_%2F_BS),_Computer_Science_(CS)/Salary#by_Years_Experience

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Master_of_Science_(MS),_Computer_Science_(CS)/Salary#by_Years_Experience

The opportunity cost is a reasonable point. Spending 2 years on a masters could be 2 less years of work. However, you'd be a fool if you weren't doing internships while working on your degree (for a CS major), and an internship at the graduate level can be quite lucrative. You're also not considering people in funded programs and those who are pursuing a masters while working. The latter will have zero opportunity cost, and perhaps will have tuition covered by their employer.

For me personally, I don't think about the opportunity cost at all. I don't view delaying my entry into the workforce as losing/spending money.

Edited March 1, 2015 by shadowclaw

[Cheshire_Cat]

You're forgetting that those averages salaries are for experienced graduates, not those fresh out of school. A CS major isn't going to make $93k fresh out of undergrad. According to Payscale.com, the average starting salary with a BS is $57k to 61k (depending on experience through internships). It takes 10+ years to reach that 93k figure. Someone with an MS starts anywhere from $68 to $79k, which I feel is a substantial difference.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Bachelor_of_Science_(BS_%2F_BS),_Computer_Science_(CS)/Salary#by_Years_Experience

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Master_of_Science_(MS),_Computer_Science_(CS)/Salary#by_Years_Experience

The opportunity cost is a reasonable point. Spending 2 years on a masters could be 2 less years of work. However, you'd be a fool if you weren't doing internships while working on your degree (for a CS major), and an internship at the graduate level can be quite lucrative. You're also not considering people in funded programs and those who are pursuing a masters while working. The latter will have zero opportunity cost, and perhaps will have tuition covered by their employer.

For me personally, I don't think about the opportunity cost at all. I don't view delaying my entry into the workforce as losing/spending money.

I agree, to a point.  But I was being lazy and just trying to explain opportunity cost, not use super accurate numbers. It is more complicated than that.  Most fully funded programs don't pay you nearly as much as you would make in industry though.  For instance, I'll be making over 20k less in my Ph.D than my job right now, so that 20k per year would be the opportunity cost instead of the fully 50-75k that someone at my level could expect to make in industry.  But then we are talking averages, and that changes things too I think because you don't start out with your masters making a bunch extra either, and you are two years behind your peers.  I think because it is an average then it doesn't matter if your masters is at the beginning of your career or not. But I could be wrong. I'm too brain dead to think that deeply about it.

I've run the actual costs for my own degree, but it wouldn't matter.  If I didn't make any more money, or even made less, I would still want to be an academic.  But I dated a guy who was in an EE program and thinking about quitting after his masters.  I ran the numbers and getting a Ph.D in that field doesn't increase your earnings power hardly at all.  But he decided to continue because of the qualitative factors instead.  Some people hate school and it isn't work 5-15k a year for the drama that it brings.  Others, like me, would do it even if it was less because of the lifestyle or other factors.  Most people are in the middle, and I think having a discussion on both the monetary value of higher education is important for them.

[CFBrown]

I also agree that money isn't everything. Some things require a higher degree even if they don't pay that well, but if it makes you happy and you can still eat and have a roof over your head, you should go for it.

Also, communications is a crummy field to pursue IMO, undergraduate or otherwise. When I was a freshman, half of the incoming students majored in communications. There just aren't enough jobs for all of those majors. One of my brothers got a degree in communications from a very prestigious school (and did well), and his job has nothing to do with his major, plus the pay isn't very good. He even had to work in fast food management for several years before finding it. Meanwhile, my brother who majored in accounting at a state school and then got his MBA on his employer's dime makes over $250k as a pharmaceutical sales rep.

 

My reasons for wanting a Master's in PR has a lot to do with me simply chasing my dreams, improving my skills, and making strong connections through networking. I do kind of agree with you though on the lack of jobs in communications (even though my undergrad was in marketing and management). That's why it's very important to be good at what I do, and to keep my skills sharp I've been freelancing/volunteering with local organizations and businesses needing social media/PR/marketing help.

[ilovelab]

Can we talk about how they pretty much listed fire fighting (fire protection) as a major? What school offers this.

 On a serious note though, how are chemical engineering and computer science on the list? While those majors don't pay very well immediately, you can easily find a job in those fields and work your way up the company.

[mockturtle]

I think it's kind of telling that they quantified a degree's value based on its expected salary, alone. Not that money isn't important, but if it's your only motivator........

[Cheshire_Cat]

Well, it is the *Business* Insider, haha! All they care about is money.   But I think it would take a lot more work to examine the qualitative factors of an advanced degree.  You would have to do quality of life studies and such...  Sounds like a good research paper though.  Maybe I'll do one on it someday.

[grad_wannabe]

business insider is the Buzzfeed of industry publications. this is clickbait, nothing more. 

[uselesstheory]

Also, while social work can be a really difficult and unglamorous field (no offense to MSW people; it's just rough starting off, is what I mean), without MSWs, we basically wouldn't have accredited, trained social workers. The reason why social work can be a difficult and unglamorous field is because social workers are always needed. It's a very necessary field, a very necessary job, and thus, a very necessary degree. It seems the article conflates worth of degree with economic worth, salary-wise, but we'd be screwed without social workers, and it's hard to refute that.

[Chai_latte]

This list is goofy.  No one majors (or gets graduate degrees) in fire protection, as ilovelab said.

The National Society of Professional Engineers is changing requirements for the P.E. license.  Going forward, students (civil and chemical, included) who want the P.E. will need a master's degree. 

Surely, this publication isn't encouraging engineers to bypass the P.E. license...and it can't possibly be advising CIVIL engineers to do so (of all disciplines).  Good grief!!!!

Academic advice is not this publication's forte.

[.letmeinplz//]

There are jobs I want that have a minimum requirement of MS (and then later on in the same track, of PhD). Business Insider would definitely make it onto a Top 10 useless websites list.

[yellowmint]

If Business Insider says it, it must be true. Just like Buzzfead and Cosmo.

Edited March 11, 2015 by yellowmint

[Cheshire_Cat]

If Business Insider says it, it must be true. Just like Buzzfead and Cosmo.

You mean Cosmo isn't true? Oh NO!  Maybe that is why I haven't found the man of my dreams. I was using their flirting tips, darnit.

[Roll Right]

Take note: the salary figures are based on averages, not median incomes. its likely that those averages are overrepresenting incomes at the bottom, or the top, of the income distribution in each of those fields. I wouldn't put much stock in their estimations because of that.

Also, I find it interesting that many of the degrees listed in that article are related to coveted STEM fields. There is supposed to be a shortage of STEM workers in the US right now, hence the push for greater H1B quotas by corporations and certain politicians. Sounds like they are far from "useless."

Finally, what about the overaccumulation crisis of global capitalism? Wages across the board have stagnated or declined for the vast majority of laborers, and productivity has also stagnated.