> all of the STEM majors are near or over the 50% mark as well.

I am not seeing that? Computer Science, to use an easy example, is 19.1% underemployed. Bad, but not 50%. Even restricted to 'recent graduates' it does not look that grim? If I'm misreading the data, please correct me. I have kids approaching the age where they will be considering post-secondary choices so I am trying to keep an eye on things.

▲

zdragnar 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Edit: apologies, I just noticed my original comment said "all" instead of "many". That definitely isn't case as you noted.

Original: Animal and plant sciences: 53%

Biochem: 42

Biology: 51

Chemistry: 42

Engineering technologies: 44

Medical technician: 47

Miscellaneous Biological Science: 47

Miscellaneous Technologies: 49

Those were the ones that caught my eye. I'm assuming the "miscellaneous" categories are for higher degrees in very niche or specific sub fields.

STEM covers all of science, math and tech outside of medicine/ health care, so the computer science and engineering tracks are okay. Even then, I'd be a little suspect, as I'd heard elsewhere that the number of graduates has increased by 110% but the market for jobs hasn't. The good old days of ZIRP and wildly too-small talent pool are likely over for good.

	▲	rootusrootus 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		To my own discredit, I do often forget the S in STEM ;-). Thank you for improving the completeness of my knowledge with data. I've long been under the impression (might be quite wrong, of course) that a number of science fields suffer from a problem where bachelor's degrees have very little practical value because the career expectation in the field is a graduate degree. This is probably bias on my part since my most direct exposure to the phenomenon is a couple of my extended family members who got degrees in biology but then exited higher education. They can't get jobs in biology, they are stuck working jobs that would have been just as attainable right out of high school.

▲

wafflemaker 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Wouldn't it also mean, that while ⅕ of CS grads initially work as support (for example), the people with just the education needed for that (vocational school) didn't get that job, because it went to someone with a better degree?

So it's not that bad after all. At least you got the job, while somebody else didn't.

This is just me thinking. Never been to the US and I'm guessing that's what the discussion is about.

	▲	zdragnar 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Not necessarily. Many employers who don't require a college degree can be reluctant to hire someone who is "over qualified" because they are more likely to quit as soon as they get a better job, and they are more likely to keep looking for one. With that said, there's also a lot of jobs that list a college degree as a requirement that absolutely don't need one whatsoever. I suspect this is largely to cut down on the number of applicants. Back when applications were done on paper, I recall turning one in to a prospective employer, who set it on a stack of paper around 15cm tall, which just so happened to be right next to a trash can. Now that you can apply to 50 jobs in an hour because job application sites basically pre-fill applications for you, it's insane what hiring is like in any city bigger than a small town.