| ▲ | zdragnar 4 days ago | |
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. | ||