In the post itself I tried to make it clear that in reality, studying science (or at least the fields of science I listed — astronomy, pharmacology, and others) would increase your chance of getting a job. I even mentioned that you may not get a job in the field you studied, but I do think that getting a science degree prepares you better for the job market.

But the data do not support even this conclusion. There is no correction for the type of people that choose science majors, so there’s a whole slew of extraneous factors that you have not ruled out.

Math-Science Majors”

When I graduated with a Math major (1989, in a decent economy), I found out that ‘employed math major’ = ‘math teather’ or ‘programmer’ (meaning a dual major). Having neglected to get a dual major, I was out of luck.

However, I was employed – at my college job as a security guard – so I’d be part of the ~99% employed group.

Which sounded plausible to me for awhile, until I looked at the people and industries that are making enormous profits (such as oil companies and financial institutions). They’re already getting all manner of subsidies and sweetheart deals, and their shareholders and owners have successfully lobbied for the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, which have been in effect for almost ten years now, to say nothing of neutering any climate change legislation, also in the name of enabling industry to create jobs.
So, then, to the people insisting that job creation requires the implementation of Republican policies, I say simply: “Ok, you got what you wanted. Now where are all the damn jobs??”

Edit: I’m threadjacking like a mofo today. I apologize. Really, I do.

Also, any college program that challenges you to use your mind to analyze and not just memorize will make you a better employee.

This. Or rather, these (both points). Kudos for the correction, Phil, even as your underlying point still stands.

The thing is, I’ve never gone to school full-time. My family could never afford it; I’ve been working while taking classes one at a time. After ten years of retail hell, I’m no closer to an actual career then I was at age 20.

The bottom line is, I’m wondering if I should bite the bullet, take out a big loan, and go to school full-time. I could have a BS in three years. The only thing is, in my chosen field, IT, in many cases experience is often more important as a degree (one of the few fields where this is the case). I have several certs, though I definitely need more. That’s the other thing – often certs are the big deciding factor in this field.

So I’ve been extremely torn lately: Should I just try to jump in on the bottom rung, keep trying to find an entry-level job at an IT firm with the limited credentials I have, foregoing a real education (possibly indefinitely – I honestly don’t think I can work and go to school at the same time), while gaining more experience, sooner? Or should I join the ranks of folks with giant student loan debts, but finally get the education I should have pursued ten years ago?

Of course, in a way, this is all irrelevant, and I apologize, belatedly, for going so far off-topic. I assume that pretty much any career in actual science is going to require more then a Bachelor’s. Much as I love science, I don’t think I have the “stick-to-it-iveness” to pursue a higher education than that.

K, all I’d like to know is how getting a PhD makes it “harder” to get a job – what’s the story there??

Several have answered saying a PhD makes you overly-specialized. As well, even if you’re not overly-specialized, employers may not hire you anyway for a variety of reasons. Cheaper to hire a less qualified person who can still do the job, you might get bored and leave for a more stimulating job, we can’t pay you as much so you’ll probably leave for a better paying job.

There’s a glut of PhDs trying to get into academia (Nature recently had some articles on the PhD-mill), and most other jobs don’t require a PhD so it may work against you. And a PhD won’t necessarily mean you’ll get paid more (my old boss who has worked for the government (biology) is getting her PhD but it won’t add a penny to her paycheck–she’s doing it for herself).

Sometimes if there’s a job you want, you have to delete some items from your resume. You don’t include every single job you’ve ever done, only the ones that are relevant to the job you’re applying for. Same thing with your education. You don’t list it all…just the degrees that are relevant for the job you’re applying for.

Having a PhD does make it easier to move up compared to an MSc or bachelors though once you do have a job (all other things being equal).

It appears, according to that data and other data out there, that a degree in a scientific field, pursued in fullness, can offer an advantage. But it’s obviously not a certainty because one’s educational experience aren’t just what classes you take. It’s also what networking experiences you engage in, what volunteer activities you do, where your interests take you during that time. It’s also continuous and doesn’t end once you get a piece of paper and are shuffled out the door.

Taking full advantage of your education doesn’t just make you a better employee, it will also make you a better boss, managers, negotiator, researcher. It enables you to see what’s out there, what opportunities exist, and can help in creating a company or collaboration to address opportunities.

The right education can also “make you a better employee” for yourself as well. So it’s not just a matter of graduating and having a super job handed to you on a silver platter but creating the next employers. Critical thinking, analytic, macro and micro understanding, the ability to work and function with people or find those who can, and most importantly the ability to follow through on ideas, concepts, gut feelings, promises… all of this makes a person successful to ones self and as an member of academia, corporations, research institutes, business entities, or government institutions and agencies.

Consequently, this study covers a huge range of people, from those freshly out of college and those who graduated in the 70s or 80s etc. In addition, what if someone graduated with a degree in X, worked in the field for 20 years, then lost their job when they filled in the census…it would count as unemployed. As mentioned before, a job is a job, no matter the pay rate or whether the job is in the field of their major or not. Therefore, like Phil said, this is really a study of what skills will make you employable, not what fields have more job opportunities.

Finally, there is a column in the full database that ranks the popularity of majors. Astronomy & Astrophysics is one of the lowest ranks there (i.e. least popular), signifying that the number of people on the census that identified themselves as an Astronomy/Astrophysics major could be pretty small. In fact, for several majors with 0.0% unemployment, the popularity is very low as well. So definitely could be some effect there too!

While most conservatives whom I see and hear do believe that many kids are not being taught the right things (or at least not in the right ways—IOW, not in ways that gets results), what conservatives claim is a huge factor in the current high unemployment rate is actions and policies on the part of the federal and state governments that hurt the ability of job creators to grow and create more jobs.

Also, any college program that challenges you to use your mind to analyze and not just memorize will make you a better employee.

K, all I’d like to know is how getting a PhD makes it “harder” to get a job – what’s the story there??

Because having a PhD makes you overspecialised – you can only expect to be employed within a pretty narrow field, unless you can demonstrate some related, transferable skill (for example, Phil is now a writer having started out with an astronomy PhD, but I suspect that he would not have been able to start out as a writer fresh from grad school, and I guess he would have found it hard to get a publisher were it not for his outreach work).

I wish I had spent more time in the ‘pure’ sciences as I’ve found them increasingly fascinating over the years, so I’ve gone back to take some more science courses part-time, just out of interest. (And I decided to do an MBA while I’m at it — about half done with that.)

I think those early adult years are the best time to get a foundation in maths and sciences, as it takes a lot of time and effort that’s not so easy to achieve once ‘real life’ takes hold. Does this foundation help with one’s job prospects? Well, looking at the short supply and relatively high demand, I’d say ‘probably’.

People who choose sciencey majors might be more employable in the first place.

Thus, the act of choosing a science major might be completely irrelevant. Instead, what might improve your chances of getting a job could be simply being the kind of person who would choose a science major.

One can imagine all sorts of potential reasons why this might be so (e.g. people who choose sciencey majors might think in a way that suits certain levels of the corporate system, or they might be more interested in learning for its own sake, or they might be more hardworking in general, or whatever – I don’t know), and it may not be so at all. To resolve the question would require a far larger, more detailed and carefully-designed study than you have done.

This wasn’t so bad when the state picked up the tab, but now it’s at the student’s own expense, the results can be devastating.