Franciscan University Thread

[4588686]

I'm saying that you need higher cognitive math ability to complete an engineering degree vs accounting. If you think you can "memorize" the math involved, well, you can't. That's where those extra 4-5 years of math come in.

Are you comparing a graduate degree in engineering to an undergraduate degree in accounting?

[LittleWaySoul]

It's about a 32.

I HAVE HOPE!

 

Also, try to find ways to network with the grad students at Franciscan who are continuing. Are they meeting with success, getting funding. What research opportunities have they taken advantage of? Can you take advantage too? Etc

Cool. Thanks! :)

[NotreDame]

Are you comparing a graduate degree in engineering to an undergraduate degree in accounting?

 

No, bachelors to bachelors.  You will need to start an engineering major with more math than an accounting major, then you will still take math all 4 years.  Some of the classes are 'applied math', so they are taught in the college of engineering, but it's still math.
 

You can take more math as an accounting undergrad if you want, but usually one course of biz calc is enough.  IF biz calc is the baseline, then you are in for 4-5 more years of math to reach what an engineering degree requires (well, the popular ones, at least... environmental is for sure less, civil might be less, maybe less for mechanical too, but not by much.)

[NotreDame]

Anyway, my point was that accounting is a good degree and an even better career.  There are jobs in every geographical location and there always will be.  You get a solid accounting undergrad and take the CPA and you have a lot of options and a long career ahead of you.

 

I'm not sure I'd say the same about engineering, to be honest. I'm not sure I'd encourage someone today to study any engineering major except CS.

[PhuturePriest]

Anyway, my point was that accounting is a good degree and an even better career.  There are jobs in every geographical location and there always will be.  You get a solid accounting undergrad and take the CPA and you have a lot of options and a long career ahead of you.

 

I'm not sure I'd say the same about engineering, to be honest. I'm not sure I'd encourage someone today to study any engineering major except CS.

 

You're the only person who has ever told me not to go into engineering. Everyone else says it's a solid field that's guaranteed to get me jobs and pay me well (The median pay is $80,000). Is it an easy field? Absolutely not. Will I struggle with some of the classes? Most probably. But I shouldn't avoid something because it will be difficult.

[NotreDame]

You're the only person who has ever told me not to go into engineering. Everyone else says it's a solid field that's guaranteed to get me jobs and pay me well (The median pay is $80,000). Is it an easy field? Absolutely not. Will I struggle with some of the classes? Most probably. But I shouldn't avoid something because it will be difficult.

 

You realize you are 17 year old from Kansas talking to someone 20 years older than you, with an engineering degree, who has made a career working for Silicon Valley companies, right?

 

You'd be smart to reply to me with a question asking for more information, not a smug little response like the one above.  

[PhuturePriest]

You realize you are 17 year old from Kansas talking to someone 20 years older than you, with an engineering degree, who has made a career working for Silicon Valley companies, right?

 

You'd be smart to reply to me with a question asking for more information, not a smug little response like the one above.  

 

Smug? I simply said that you were the only person who recommended against engineering, and that I was willing to put in the hard work. Where was the smugness?

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

If you are deciding between accounting and engineering, in the end, the decision should be based on which one you like better--ideally that you love one of them. Both are careers with solid prospects. But, accounting and engineering are VERY different careers.

 

If you don't know for sure which of the two you want, you may end up having to take at least a course or two in each to decide. I hope that that's an option, and that you don't have to decide before applying for college.

 

In today's world, a lot of emphasis is placed on picking a solid career. But, in the end, you will probably be spending at least 30-40 years in whatever career you choose. Of course, you will probably change employers over the course of your career. It's really awful to be in a job you don't love or at least like a lot, even if you manage to find a great workplace (which in and of itself is difficult).

 

Take this for what it's worth (basically nothing) but from the tiny bit I know of you on Phatmass, I find it hard to picture you as either an accountant or an engineer. However, I don't know you at all, and there are almost certainly sides to your personality that we don't see here. (I know that there are many aspects of my personality that I don't show in my Phatmass posts.)

 

In any case, good luck in your decision, and you will certainly have my prayers. I attended two large, state, secular, very academically difficult and competitive universities (Berkeley for my BA and UCLA for my Master's) so I have no personal wisdom to share when it comes to deciding between small, private, Catholic schools.

 

 

[PhuturePriest]

Take this for what it's worth (basically nothing) but from the tiny bit I know of you on Phatmass, I find it hard to picture you as either an accountant or an engineer. However, I don't know you at all, and there are almost certainly sides to your personality that we don't see here. (I know that there are many aspects of my personality that I don't show in my Phatmass posts.)

 

Why do you think I wouldn't be a good fit for either one? I'm not arguing, just curious.

[Nihil Obstat]

Some people are not cut out for either. I am not. I do not like the math enough to stick with an engineering degree, and accounting is very dry to me. I have taken accounting classes which are requirements, and I got through them, but I did not enjoy them. Managerial accounting less so, but substantially the same.

It takes a specific sort of person to do those courses. Not because they are the hardest courses ever (although perhaps some of them are), but simply because they require a specific sort of learning style and outlook.

If you can do it, then that is awesome. Personally I think accounting is a way cooler profession than engineering, but I am biased. If you put in the work to either of those, it is true that you are generally guaranteed a job that will keep you comfortable. But there is no shame in not being cut out for either. I am not, particularly. I would rather do something on a management side of things.

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

Why do you think I wouldn't be a good fit for either one? I'm not arguing, just curious.

 

This is obviously a gross over-simplification, but I have found that, in general, when looking at what a person LOVES to do, some people are more interested in "people" and some people are more interested in "things." There is nothing better or worse about either type of personality. And, most people seem to have at least a little of both, but usually favor one over the other. And, it doesn't really have anything to do with being an extrovert versus an introvert.

 

Obviously, depending on your job, there can be a lot of people contact in either accounting or engineering. But, based on what I know of friends in both professions, accountants and engineers tend to be "thing" people. Just to give one example, I dated a guy who was a computer guy with a degree in engineering. One day he called me, very excited, because he had just gotten a new computer, and with his two computers he had set up a system at home. Computer systems are "things."

 

People who are more interested in "people" enjoy learning and thinking about people, and about why people do things, or applying general principles or ideas to human behavior. I am a good example of a "people" person. For example, when I travel, although I enjoy visiting landmarks, and cathedrals, and museums, I most enjoy learning about how the people live, what their day-to-day lives are like. "People" people often have jobs that involve service, whether it is the public or clients. I suspect most teachers are "people" people (assuming they care about the students they are teaching). But, managers (good ones, at least) are also often more interested in "people" not "things." I suspect most priests are primarily "people" people.

 

Again, almost no one is interested solely in "people" versus "things" or vice versa. But, in my life experience, most of the engineers and accountants I have met or worked with were mostly "thing" people.

 

For whatever reason, I see you as a "people" person. I see you in some kind of job that has responsibilities involving contact with and relating to people. You might become a priest. But, if you don't, I see you in some other kind of profession that involves people, such as teaching or social work. BTW--"People" jobs aren't necessarily in "helping" professions. For example, people in marketing (at least in my experience) tend to be "people" people, because their job is trying to find the best way to sell their product to customers. To do that, they have to understand and think about who their current and potential customers are.

 

It isn't a matter of what you are good at. For example, I am good at both "people" and "things" in almost equal measure. But, when I think about work that makes me most satisfied, where the time flies, it is people I find much more interesting. In college, you still have to learn about both people and things. For example, a teacher must truly understand their subject in order to teach it well.

 

So, in the end, it's about what gets you excited, and what keeps you interested. Since we're talking about something that you'll be doing for 30-40 years, and where you are very likely to spend more time at your job than your family, finding what you "love to do" is VERY important. In fact, in my life experience, I have found that it is arguably THE most important factor in choosing a career.

 

From your posts, you seem more like a "people" person to me than a "thing" person. That doesn't mean you aren't interested in "things" at all, it's just that I see you getting more excited about people issues and how you and others feel, than about "things."

 

But, obviously, I only see one fairly small slice of what you are like in your posts on Phatmass, so I could be completely wrong.

 

BTW--Like Nihil, I find accounting dry. I spent most of my career "teaching." I spent most of my career educating clients on tax law, and how changes in tax laws would affect human resource issues in their companies. I personally find tax law fascinating. But, my job was really a "people" job, because the thing that got me most interested was trying to explain tax law to people who were neither lawyers nor accountants. (And I am neither a lawyer nor an accountant.) I spent my time "teaching" both by doing things like leading classes and giving speeches to at meetings and conventions, but also by writing papers and newsletters--that is, educating people through my writing. To do that well, I had to understand my clients, and what they needed to know most, and how to best present the information. So, although I talked about "things," my job was really a "people" job.

 

But, the "job" in my life that I loved best was volunteering at the zoo. I discovered very late that I LOVE animals and am endlessly fascinated by them. If I had to do it over, I might have majored in zoology and become a zoo curator, because I am fascinated by animal behavior. But, the reason why volunteering at the zoo was so perfect for me is that I was a docent (Latin for teacher). I LOVED talking to the public about a subject I also loved, that is, animal behavior. I had to talk about animal behavior to 3-year olds, college students, inner city kids--the whole gamut, every time I went to the zoo.

 

Since I don't know you very well, take this for what it's worth, which is probably very little.

[4588686]

I think what people are aiming at here, Future Priest, is that you need to focus on a specific skill set.  My political science degree had a concentration in foreign affairs.  Specifically the wars in Chechnya and their effect on Russian domestic law.  I also took some higher level classes in mathematical logic and game theory.  Those were great intellectual experiences and I am certainly glad that I took them.  If I could go back in time I would not radically alter my class selections.  I would just make some minor adjustments.  UNC Chapel Hill has a solid business school and I would have taken some of the advanced excel classes.  I know plenty of excel for my level but political work has a absolutely brutal pace and I really no longer have the time to 'learn' things.  Just sit down for hours and grapple with material.  

 

You're at an age where you can really take advantage of your time to figure out ahead of time what specific skills you want to pick up while you're at school.  You should really take advantage of that.  

 

 

[4588686]

My point is that you don't need to give up studying the subjects that interest you intellectually.  You can still take lots of theology classes that have nothing to do with what you'll eventually do.  Just don't overlook picking up the solid and specific skills that you'll need down the road.  

[PhuturePriest]

This is obviously a gross over-simplification, but I have found that, in general, when looking at what a person LOVES to do, some people are more interested in "people" and some people are more interested in "things." There is nothing better or worse about either type of personality. And, most people seem to have at least a little of both, but usually favor one over the other. And, it doesn't really have anything to do with being an extrovert versus an introvert.

 

Obviously, depending on your job, there can be a lot of people contact in either accounting or engineering. But, based on what I know of friends in both professions, accountants and engineers tend to be "thing" people. Just to give one example, I dated a guy who was a computer guy with a degree in engineering. One day he called me, very excited, because he had just gotten a new computer, and with his two computers he had set up a system at home. Computer systems are "things."

 

People who are more interested in "people" enjoy learning and thinking about people, and about why people do things, or applying general principles or ideas to human behavior. I am a good example of a "people" person. For example, when I travel, although I enjoy visiting landmarks, and cathedrals, and museums, I most enjoy learning about how the people live, what their day-to-day lives are like. "People" people often have jobs that involve service, whether it is the public or clients. I suspect most teachers are "people" people (assuming they care about the students they are teaching). But, managers (good ones, at least) are also often more interested in "people" not "things." I suspect most priests are primarily "people" people.

 

Again, almost no one is interested solely in "people" versus "things" or vice versa. But, in my life experience, most of the engineers and accountants I have met or worked with were mostly "thing" people.

 

For whatever reason, I see you as a "people" person. I see you in some kind of job that has responsibilities involving contact with and relating to people. You might become a priest. But, if you don't, I see you in some other kind of profession that involves people, such as teaching or social work. BTW--"People" jobs aren't necessarily in "helping" professions. For example, people in marketing (at least in my experience) tend to be "people" people, because their job is trying to find the best way to sell their product to customers. To do that, they have to understand and think about who their current and potential customers are.

 

It isn't a matter of what you are good at. For example, I am good at both "people" and "things" in almost equal measure. But, when I think about work that makes me most satisfied, where the time flies, it is people I find much more interesting. In college, you still have to learn about both people and things. For example, a teacher must truly understand their subject in order to teach it well.

 

So, in the end, it's about what gets you excited, and what keeps you interested. Since we're talking about something that you'll be doing for 30-40 years, and where you are very likely to spend more time at your job than your family, finding what you "love to do" is VERY important. In fact, in my life experience, I have found that it is arguably THE most important factor in choosing a career.

 

From your posts, you seem more like a "people" person to me than a "thing" person. That doesn't mean you aren't interested in "things" at all, it's just that I see you getting more excited about people issues and how you and others feel, than about "things."

 

But, obviously, I only see one fairly small slice of what you are like in your posts on Phatmass, so I could be completely wrong.

 

BTW--Like Nihil, I find accounting dry. I spent most of my career "teaching." I spent most of my career educating clients on tax law, and how changes in tax laws would affect human resource issues in their companies. I personally find tax law fascinating. But, my job was really a "people" job, because the thing that got me most interested was trying to explain tax law to people who were neither lawyers nor accountants. (And I am neither a lawyer nor an accountant.) I spent my time "teaching" both by doing things like leading classes and giving speeches to at meetings and conventions, but also by writing papers and newsletters--that is, educating people through my writing. To do that well, I had to understand my clients, and what they needed to know most, and how to best present the information. So, although I talked about "things," my job was really a "people" job.

 

But, the "job" in my life that I loved best was volunteering at the zoo. I discovered very late that I LOVE animals and am endlessly fascinated by them. If I had to do it over, I might have majored in zoology and become a zoo curator, because I am fascinated by animal behavior. But, the reason why volunteering at the zoo was so perfect for me is that I was a docent (Latin for teacher). I LOVED talking to the public about a subject I also loved, that is, animal behavior. I had to talk about animal behavior to 3-year olds, college students, inner city kids--the whole gamut, every time I went to the zoo.

 

Since I don't know you very well, take this for what it's worth, which is probably very little.

 

You're closer to the mark than you think. I'm most definitely a "people" person. I like talking to people, discussing things with them, learning, sharing, etc.

[Era Might]

http://youtu.be/XMOmB1q8W4Y