Stressed about picking your major? Feeling pressure to pick a major that’s “practical” or tied to a particular career?
Understandable. That can feel like a monumental decision.
And your major can definitely matter: If your dream is to work at Google, you’ll probably have an easier (maybe much easier) time getting hired there with a major connected to things like CS and programming, or design, or marketing than a degree in, say, French. (You’ll also probably have an easier time with a PhD …)
But it’s also true that, frequently, your major may not matter as much as you think, or in the ways that you think.
So we’re going to drill down into some more precise ways to think about your major, then offer what maybe be a more meaningful way to think about your degree and the work you do in your life.
Useful Questions to Help Re/Frame
Here’s an instructive quote from Keith Johnstone, a pioneer of improv theater:
“There are people who prefer to say 'yes,' and there are people who prefer to say 'no.' Those who say 'yes' are rewarded by the adventures they have. Those who say 'no' are rewarded by the safety they attain.”
To clarify, he’s not saying one is better than the other. Safety and adventure are both valuable. The important thing here is to reflect on what you want your life to look like.
How much safety? How much adventure? And how does this relate to your major?
I’ve found that many students find it very valuable to reflect on their major and career choices using this framing.
Some people want the safety of a “normal” 9-to-5 job. For example, I know a guy, a plumber, who moved to Louisiana to work because what he wanted most, what made him feel most fulfilled, was buying a bigger house outside of town (cheaper in Louisiana than Los Angeles), where he could raise and spend as much time as possible with his family.
Others want their lives to look … a little different. For example, my brothers got degrees related to marine biology and ecology, and have done things like scientific diving (doing marine wildlife counts), or getting their captain’s licenses and running sailing whale-watching tours, or flying around the world doing wind-turbine repair (minimal connection to marine bio, I know). They have zero interest in a “normal” 9-to-5.
Neither is wrong. This is a question of understanding what you value (not what other people value), what you want your life to look like, and how that shapes your choices around things like major and career.
With that in mind, I want to address some common misconceptions around majors.
1. Employers frequently care more about your skills and abilities than your degree.
Your future boss is generally more interested in your skills, abilities, and understanding than in your major. Specifically:
A) A 2013 study conducted by the Association of American Colleges and Universities found that 93% of the employers surveyed believed that critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving skills were more important than a candidate’s undergraduate major.
They’re focusing on those skills because the kinds of responsibilities you’ll have to take on are often broader than they once were, and the problems you’ll need to help tackle have become more complex.
That study is backed up by two other reports from 2018, discussed and linked here, that found “the skill sets of graduates—rather than their major—might matter most in hiring.” Furthermore, the Strada Institute for the Future of Work concluded that “most of the current literature on the future of work underscores this growing need for human skills such as flexibility, mental agility, ethics, resilience, systems thinking, communication, and critical thinking.”
B) Author Zac Bissonette points out that there’s “a disconnect between students’ perceptions of what employers want and what employers actually want.” He cites an article in the Canadian HR Reporter, which claimed that, according to a survey by Toronto’s George Brown College, generation Y (aged 18 to 35) tended to believe employers are looking for experience, when, in fact, most employers found communication skills to be the most important.
So, think about how you’ll work in college to develop those kinds of thinking and communication skills (among other valued “soft” skills). Do your major and class load help you develop those skills? How will you work to become more mentally agile, ethical, resilient, to develop skills in critical and systems thinking? (Remember, these are skills you can grow in, not fixed talents or abilities.)
2. Medical schools and law schools may care less about your major than you think.
It’s a common (and seemingly natural) assumption that biology majors are more likely to get into med school than, say, English majors.
You know what they say about assumptions though ...
The Association of American Medical Colleges publishes information on applicants and matriculants data.
In 2020-1, 42 percent of biological science majors, 41 percent of social science majors, 46 percent of math and statistics majors, and 48 percent of both physical sciences and humanities majors were accepted into medical school. So what does that mean?
I’m going to get just a little wonky on you here. You have to be careful about what conclusions you draw from this data. After all, it’s possible (in fact, it seems likely) that the numbers have more to do with students from some majors getting into med school at a higher rate because they have better stats than others, rather than the difference in major. For example, math and statistics majors (in the AAMC data) have the highest average MCAT scores, and the highest average GPAs, followed by students in the physical sciences. But, at the risk of redundancy, don't confuse correlation and causation here: These students are very likely getting in because of their stronger general academic achievements, not because their major is different.
And there could be important differences in terms of who’s applying from within those majors—in 2020, 1,738 humanities majors applied to med school, compared to the 30,921 biological sciences students who applied. Those are drastically different denominators. It’s very possible (and again, it seems highly likely) that the few humanities majors applying to med school are pretty exceptional students, as they are also crushing the MCAT at the same level as bio majors.
But, as mentioned in US News & World Report, there’s been a shift over the past 15 years in what med school admissions committees are focusing on. While previously, prep in biomedical sciences was key, now there’s more of a focus on balance (as in, a foundation in science, and development in the humanities).
So there’s a slightly complex takeaway here: Because it’s your GPA and MCAT scores that matter more to medical schools, a humanities major (or some other non-biology major) is certainly no obstacle to applying to med school, as long as you’re willing to build a solid foundation in the sciences to do well on your MCAT and beyond, and do the work necessary to maintain a high GPA.
There are similar takeaways when it comes to law school. This Forbes article quotes the American Bar Association as saying:
“The ABA does not recommend any undergraduate majors or group of courses to prepare for a legal education. Students are admitted to law school from almost every academic discipline.”
The article then points out that a “study by a Chicago State University professor bears this out: the top ten majors with the highest acceptance rates for law school include philosophy, anthropology, history and English.”
And some of the same reasons apply: The kinds of critical thinking and communication skills you develop as an English major are incredibly useful on the LSAT and in a courtroom. That’s why majors like classics and environmental studies, and mathematics and philosophy, have some of the highest acceptance rates.
So don’t just major in something because you think it gives you a leg up on med or law school admissions. Major in things that you’re fascinated by, that you’ll do well in, and that will help you develop the skills and understanding you need for a complex field.
3. Your job may not exist yet.
Here’s a list of 10 jobs that didn’t exist as recently as 2005. The list includes app developer, sustainability expert, social media manager, and (one of my jobs) educational consultant. Those seem (to me) to be some pretty awesome careers to explore. And there are plenty of people exploring them right now who went to college when they didn’t exist. Who knows what new careers will exist in 10 years? Maybe yours.
So, again, think about this key question: how will your major help you develop both hard and soft skills to pursue what you want to do with your life?
When should you worry about your major (when does it matter)?
When your major does matter, says Lindsey Pollak, author of Getting from College to Career, is “when it comes to your happiness and fulfillment in college.” Are you enjoying what you’re getting to explore? Is it leading you to a fuller life?
And on the practical side, it’s useful to notice that enjoying what you study will likely have all kinds of useful knock-on effects, including that:
You’ll probably get better grades, which is something employers value (as a sign of diligence, etc.).
You’ll probably develop more of those “soft” skills I mentioned earlier.
There are a few other important things to reflect on:
Majors and income
I think there are a few important things to consider here, so you can make informed choices with your life.
In what ways exactly does income matter?
This connects back to that “adventure vs. safety” thing—higher income can create a sense of safety that many people value. And there’s a clear correlation between majors and income levels.
And there’s some useful research on income and well-being: For example, this well-known study out of Princeton by Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton.
I’m going to get into some nuance again, because there are a lot of pop-sci interpretations of that study—I’ve seen tons of articles online that misrepresent things.
Imagine. The internet misinterpreting. Crazy, I know.
Kahneman and Deaton found that increased earnings up to $75,000 a year does add to your emotional well-being. But anything above that leveled off in some ways—emotional well-being didn’t improve over 75K.
Notice I said “emotional well-being.” Not “happiness.” “Happiness” is a tricky, nebulous word. You can use it to refer to your daily emotional well-being. But if by happiness you mean “life satisfaction” or “subjective well-being,” that keeps going up with income (though non-linearly). Confused? No worries.
Emotional well-being is a specific thing—it’s usually measured by asking people about their emotions the previous day. Like: “Did you experience the following feelings a lot of the day yesterday? How about (insert emotions like “stress” or “happiness” here)?” This is what levels off after 75K, and understandably so—being able to afford access to things like healthcare and a safe place to live makes a difference in your day-to-day emotional experience.
Life satisfaction is multifaceted, but one way to think of it (and how it’s different from daily emotional well-being) is that it’s more like your answer to the question, “On a scale from 0-10, relative to the best life possible for yourself, where does your life rank?” (If you really want to dive into the Cantril Scale, check this out.) Many other things play into life satisfaction, but for what we’re discussing here, life satisfaction keeps increasing without a clear tipping point regarding income, non-linearly. As in, if you make 60K a year, adding 10K has a bigger impact than adding 10K for someone making 120K a year. But the 10K correlates with higher life satisfaction regardless.
This question about majors and income (and how you weigh things as you make choices for your life) also connects to your values: People frequently connect income with social status (I say “frequently” because they don’t have to … you can separate those things). Is social status something you value? How much do you worry about other people’s perceptions of you, and of how you compare to them? Some part of how income influences happiness likely relates to “keeping up with the Joneses”—how people rate their subjective well-being often depends on how they perceive where they are relative to other people.
Which, to be blunt, I don’t think is a very smart or useful way to live and evaluate a life. But we’re probably biologically wired to compare ourselves to others. So when the impulse to evaluate your life based on how other people are doing arises, I’d recommend ignoring it as best you can. Ultimately, this is really on you—what are your values?
Income and meaning: Doing (more) good in the world
In most ways, money doesn’t seem to help with bigger existential questions around meaning and purpose (and I’m probably stating the obvious here). As in, income probably isn’t going to help you determine what’s meaningful. That takes other work.
But there’s one way that money can help with your sense of meaning. Here’s where I’m going to pitch you on reframing how you think of income ...
One of the clearest ways to find/create a sense of meaning in your life is to find ways to do good in the world.
And it just so happens that you can actually measure how you can do good better. I know that looks like a typo. It isn’t.
I mean that some ways of doing good in the world are more effective than others.
Over the last few decades, some of the best thinkers in the world (like this guy) have dedicated their lives (and brains) to figuring out how we can try to make sure we’re doing the most good with the resources we have. Since all lives are of equal value, how do we try to ensure that we’re alleviating the most suffering we can?
This is the heart of Effective Altruism.
For example, Peter Singer points out that, while it’s admirable to train a seeing-eye dog for a blind person, that training (and the training for the blind person to use the dog) tends to cost around $40,000 U.S. dollars. With that money, you could cure somewhere between 400 and 2,000 blind people in a developing country of trachoma. So if we have limited resources, we should probably go with the second option.
That’s Effective Altruism in a nutshell.
Some organizations and charities are drastically more effective (hundreds or thousands of times more effective) than others at alleviating human suffering. Luckily, other people have done the work for you in figuring out which ones do what how well (again, not a typo). And while I don’t want you to get neurotic and just create stress for yourself, I would encourage you to think about (among other things) how you can use your college education to do good better.
So here’s one way to reframe your major (and the correlated income): Don’t just make income for income’s sake—make income to make meaning. If you major in something that helps you make 150K/year, and you use 75ish to meet that emotional well-being threshold, and give most of the rest away to create a better world and save lives … I’m betting you’ll get a pretty profound sense of meaning out of that.
Plus, if you want to keep doing the whole compare-yourself-to-others thing, that’s a pretty rad comparison.
Conveniently, finding/creating this kind of meaning tends to correlate strongly with high levels of life satisfaction. For more on this, check out Dr. Martin Seligman’s work on “happiness” (you can dive in here or here, or start with this TED Talk here).
Here’s my advice:
I don’t think there’s a simple takeaway here. Rather, I think there are several things you should consider:
Major in something that’ll allow you to develop those critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving skills we talked about earlier, in conjunction with studying the things you love or think you might love.
Think about where you land on the safety vs. adventure spectrum.
Think about your values, where you create meaning, and how your major can help you do so.
I know I’m asking you some huge questions here. But that’s because I believe they’re worth asking.
Here are some great resources to help you learn more about what Effective Altruism (EA) is and why it matters:
For a quick (17-minute) intro, check out Singer’s TED Talk: The Why and How of Effective Altruism. Singer offers a brief overview of Effective Altruism (EA), and introduces, among other things:
Website: 80000hours.org.
Premise:
“You have 80,000 hours in your career. How can you best use them to help solve the world’s most pressing problems?”
For a longer discussion, listen to Sam Harris’ conversation with William MacAskill. MacAskill is a co-founder of Effective Altruism. He and Harris discuss how folks can make a difference, and how they can better think about making a difference.
How do you evaluate charities/nonprofits?
Book: Doing Good Better: How Effective Altruism Can Help You Make a Difference
MacAskill’s book lays out EA in greater detail.
Premise: Some charities are more effective than others. But the best charities aren’t just two or three times better… they’re hundreds of times more effective. This book explores how you can decide how best to donate.
Where do you find an organization you can work with now?
For everyone, students included (evaluated based on Effective Altruism): http://givewell.org/
For students (not evaluated by GiveWell): https://www.dosomething.org/us
Written by Andy Simpson, College Essay Guy coach
Andrew has worked as an educator, consultant, and curriculum writer for the past 15 years, and attended Stanford and Oxford, earning degrees in Political Science and Drama. He feels most at home on mountain tops.
Top Values: Insight/Growth | Truth | Integrity