The 20 worst-paying college degrees in 2010

[Hacp]

If it's so great then be a teacher. Oh wait, babysitting dozens of brats every day actually sucks.

I would but NYC has a hiring freeze right now. Get me in and I'll jump at the opportunity right away.

 

[Daishiki]

Not a CS or an engineering degree, but yeah what are you going to do with a degree in art history? teach art history maybe

Musuem curator. You'll need more than a bachelor's though.

 

[SLCentral]

My friend's brother is majoring in "hospitality management".

I thought she was joking, until I checked online. Yup, our school does indeed offer a degree in hospitality management (or something like that, I think it was a business degree with some extra classes).

And what the hell is wrong with that? Do you not realize how large the hospitality industry is? Hotels, resorts, casinos, restaurants, etc. It's billions and billions of dollars.

 

[Whisper]

If that list is for undergraduate degrees, I'm surprised psychology isn't included, especially considering that social work made the list.

Maybe all those low-paying research assistant jobs are balanced out by the fact that since psychology is such a popular major, invariably some undergrad psych majors will go on to be multi-millionaires.

 

[mizzou]

how does art history make any money at all?

 

[Cogman]

And what the hell is wrong with that? Do you not realize how large the hospitality industry is? Hotels, resorts, casinos, restaurants, etc. It's billions and billions of dollars.

And now you too can learn how to be nice! Call today, operators are standing by!

 

[DVad3r]

That's why I'd never move to the US in my field.

Elementary teacher here tops out at 80 g'z per year + a lot of perks.

Special education? lol, with all the qualifications and cap out, close to $ 100.

 

[shortylickens]

how does art history make any money at all?

Mostly teaching art history.
But also museums and such. And sometimes art galleries, though such places are normally run by business majors and usually just consult with art historians from time to time.
Most art history majors end up in generic jobs that just needed a degree, not a useful degree.

 

[PrinceofWands]

What? Are you really as stupid as you pretend to be on these forums? I was simply stating that saying teachers are not paid well is a load of crock. I never said it was an easy or desirable (for me) job. But to say they are "underpaid" nowadays is just stupid.

We've had this discussion on here numerous times, but: to require a degree/certificate in education, a degree in every field you'll teach, a graduate degree within 5 years of teaching, AND extra classes for endorsements...then start them out at 28-36k/yr (IF they're lucky enough to find a 1.0 position, which they probably won't)? Never mind having to deal with bureaucracy, parents, and kids all day. Never mind paying for a lot of your teaching materials yourself because the school budgets don't allow for what you need. Never mind the additional hours of planning (at least at first), and the hours of grading (forever), and the counseling, and the extra-curricular program overseeing. That seems overpaid/reasonable somehow?

Yeah, after 10+ years in a good paying area the pay becomes competitive, but that also means 10 years of continuing education, national certifications, etc.

 

[roguerower]

It's sad that nutrition and dietitian majors get hosed, especially with the way our country is headed. My GF graduated with a dietetics degree and she busted her ass for 4 years as well as the 1 year of grad school/internship she's currently taking. She does enjoy it and she isn't doing it for the money.

That said, I'm perfectly happy 3 mo out of school and well above that chart...if only I wasn't working 50-60hrs a week.

 

[PrinceofWands]

An education should be treated as an investment and you should consider the ROI. IMO, it isn't a wise investment to go to a private school and obtain tens of thousands of dollars of student loans to get a liberal arts degree.

Yes, but the ROI isn't merely in $$. It's in personal enrichment, understanding, critical thinking, civic participation, happiness, betterment of mankind, etc. To see the world in terms of $ is what's REALLY stupid (imo).

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Yes, but the ROI isn't merely in $$. It's in personal enrichment, understanding, critical thinking, civic participation, happiness, betterment of mankind, etc. To see the world in terms of $ is what's REALLY stupid (imo).

But unfortunately, that's reality. I would have loved to study history all the time. Unfortunately, it isn't financially feasible to do so in most cases. So, IMO, you should try to take a route which gives you the best chance to make yourself as financially comfortable as possible and then you can indulge your true interests. It isn't that I hate my job; IT does interest me. But in the grand scheme of things, it is a job and like any normal person, I wish I could indulge my interests 24 x 7 x 365.

In my case, my job has placed me in a very good financial position. I'm able to travel all over the world to see historical sites. The first time I was in Rome and went to the Coliseum was one of the most awe-inspiring experiences in my life. When I went to Paris and Florence last November/December, I was blown away by the art galleries and museums. I also went to Hawaii this past May and it really sparked my interest in learning about the history of the islands.

You don't really need college to become educated; if you have access to books, the internet, are able to travel, and have the will, you can learn so much about this world we live in.

Where I agree with you is that I think in America, too many people see a job as the end, rather than the means to an end.

 

[PrinceofWands]

But unfortunately, that's reality.

There is no meaningful reality outside of individual perception.

I would have loved to study history all the time. Unfortunately, it isn't financially feasible to do so in most cases.

Then you've place personal finances and material desires above your interest in history...which is fine for YOU personally, but maybe not others.

So, IMO, you should try to take a route which gives you the best chance to make yourself as financially comfortable as possible...

But there are two paths to that...one is earning more, the other is spending less. There's also the option to do both.

In my case, my job has placed me in a very good financial position. I'm able to travel all over the world to see historical sites.

Others experience the same sites, without the financial position you claim to require. It's just that they place a premium on the history, while you place a premium on the finances.

You don't really need college to become educated; if you have access to books, the internet, are able to travel, and have the will, you can learn so much about this world we live in.

Where I agree with you is that I think in America, too many people see a job as the end, rather than the means to an end.

On that we entirely agree. We also agree on the whole 'spending too much on education'. It's ridiculous for people to drop $60,000 on a degree. For me, ROI doesn't even figure in...that's just a wasteful expenditure which will perpetuate the negative rather you're getting it back or not.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

There is no meaningful reality outside of individual perception.

Then you've place personal finances and material desires above your interest in history...which is fine for YOU personally, but maybe not others.

That's what is great about our country -- you can choose your own path. As long as you support yourself, I don't really care what it is you do.

But there are two paths to that...one is earning more, the other is spending less. There's also the option to do both.

And an even better third option exists -- to earn more and cut spending, which is what my wife and I do. My wife just got a new position with a huge raise and instead of us sitting down and talking about what we could buy with it like most Americans would, we're talking about ways to cut our expenses more, finish off our last set of home improvements, and then using the income to pay off our house early.

Others experience the same sites, without the financial position you claim to require. It's just that they place a premium on the history, while you place a premium on the finances.

I don't think I said it was required; what I said was that my job has placed me in a good financial position and that has allowed me to travel without worrying about how I'm going to pay the bills. I want a home of my own and the ability to travel and when I travel, I don't want to stay in hostels. I also want to save money in case disaster strikes and to have something for retirement. You do have to be in a decent financial position for all those things to fall in place.

Sure, I could make it happen on less money, but why? Again, you are going to have to work for a living, so as long as you at least mostly enjoy what you do, why not strive to make as much as possible as long as you're not sacrificing to make that happen? If I can put in my 40 hours and make great money doing it, I'll take that option and then have fun on my adventures.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Yes, but the ROI isn't merely in $$. It's in personal enrichment, understanding, critical thinking, civic participation, happiness, betterment of mankind, etc. To see the world in terms of $ is what's REALLY stupid (imo).

I love working with computers and networking. But I sure as hell not pursue a degree or career in it with tons of Indian IT grads flooding into the market.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I love working with computers and networking. But I sure as hell not pursue a degree or career in it with tons of Indian IT grads flooding into the market.

Even though I am in IT, I think you're making a wise decision. The future is really cloudy in IT and even without the threat of outsourcing, I think the "IT as a utility" model will become much more entrenched as time passes (especially with things like vSphere) and as a result, most of the IT jobs will be with either service providers or huge companies.

 

[Farang]

But unfortunately, that's reality. I would have loved to study history all the time. Unfortunately, it isn't financially feasible to do so in most cases. So, IMO, you should try to take a route which gives you the best chance to make yourself as financially comfortable as possible and then you can indulge your true interests. It isn't that I hate my job; IT does interest me. But in the grand scheme of things, it is a job and like any normal person, I wish I could indulge my interests 24 x 7 x 365.

In my case, my job has placed me in a very good financial position. I'm able to travel all over the world to see historical sites. The first time I was in Rome and went to the Coliseum was one of the most awe-inspiring experiences in my life. When I went to Paris and Florence last November/December, I was blown away by the art galleries and museums. I also went to Hawaii this past May and it really sparked my interest in learning about the history of the islands.

You don't really need college to become educated; if you have access to books, the internet, are able to travel, and have the will, you can learn so much about this world we live in.

Where I agree with you is that I think in America, too many people see a job as the end, rather than the means to an end.

You don't need college to become educated, but you probably need it if you want to thoroughly understand your field and be an expert in it. Its like saying that because there is a library, I can go read whats there and become a chemical engineer. There is a lot to be said for classroom participation and critical thinking guided by an expert. And the fact that you're doing it as work, that is you're forced to put in more than you otherwise would as a leisure activity. I didn't write analysis of political conflicts up to 30 pages long for fun, but I sure learned a lot.

And most people when they pursue hobbies or interests they just go directly to what they want to know and find practically useful. You might just read a book on Roman history and be done with it, then see the stuff in person and maybe read some more. But will you understand the fundamental concepts that guide the author's conclusions? Not unless you read some really boring books that have nothing to do with Rome. You will lack a general ability to draw conclusions of your own, instead depending on the subject to be told to you (in this case history) instead of actively participating in it.

So while yes, in theory someone could go to a large library and come out a chemical engineer, let's not kid ourselves like this is what happens in the real world very often.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

You don't need college to become educated, but you probably need it if you want to thoroughly understand your field and be an expert in it. Its like saying that because there is a library, I can go read whats there and become a chemical engineer. There is a lot to be said for classroom participation and critical thinking guided by an expert.

There is also the very real problem of viewpoints being presented which are obviously tainted by the instructor's personal bias, and this is particularly bad in certain history courses.

And the fact that you're doing it as work, that is you're forced to put in more than you otherwise would as a leisure activity. I didn't write analysis of political conflicts up to 30 pages long for fun, but I sure learned a lot.

I wasn't speaking about expert-level knowledge; of course you would need to attend a university to become an expert in a given field. I was speaking more about becoming educated in a general sense. I enjoy Roman history, but I have no desire to learn every nuance that an academic would. For me, I enjoy reading about the portions of their history that fascinate me and that's it. I'm intelligent enough to recognize that when an author states "Here was the cause of x, y, or z" that I should probably read other sources as well or some background information to see if I can make that same conclusion. And believe me, I have done that on several topics.