Can a history degree actually lead to a good job?

[Jon1970]

Hi, I'd be grateful for an opinion on the merits or not of doing a history degree. My youngest daughter is currently in A1 doing History, Geography and Economics. She was considering doing Law at Uni (still is, to an extent..) but I think she is gradually drifting away from that, which is fine...at 17 I didn't have a clue what I wanted to do. She has always loved History, and still does. There is a narrative out there on careers pages etc that History teaches you great analytical skills, problem solving and so on, the argument being that a degree in history can lead to "so many" careers. But I'm worried....in the real world, is this actually true?

I'm curious to know if you either did History yourself or someone you know, and did it lead to good opportunities further down the line? I really want to support her in doing what she wants to do and in something she enjoys, but just trying to sanity check that she won't say to me in 5 years time something like "Dad, why on earth did you let met me do a History degree?". I know that she could do a history degree and then a Law conversion course if she does want to go into law, but if she doesn't want to do law, what then?

I am probably slightly haunted by doing a music degree, and then switching later to IT and business.

I would think everything Euan Blair learnt was from daddy, mummy and their contacts.

Well obviously, but he does at least seem to be well aware of that.

Incorrect. The number of apprenticeships available is tint so this is not happening in reality.

Tiny, but increasing rapidly. I'm an IT professional in an analytical role, working in the education sector, and my team recently recruited an apprentice - she was an internal recruit - a Humanities graduate with a year's experience in a non-graduate role. She was recruited on the back of that experience, her internal references, and her aptitude for the role, not for her degree.

I graduated in 2011 and am now a city lawyer, loads of my colleagues also have history degrees (including recent graduates). My friends from uni who did history mostly work in law, finance, the civil service or as teachers.

But it's now 2024, and some law firms now have apprenticeship schemes, which they didn't have in 2011.

I didn’t realise you were only talking about entry-level @obleek tbh. PR roles usually ask for a degree at any level IME so I thought you meant that.

I still am surprised tho, as not that many top unis offer a PR degree do they? So if that’s the criterion, many quality candidates will be missed.

Gordon Brown was a history graduate.

A lot of the obvious careers like museums and libraries are not well paid. Most people I know in academia and teaching are looking for alternative careers currently.

I've known quite a few historians in tech. Accountancy, HR, banking, management, armed forces, law.

History will be great, I am prejudiced against a general Economics degree.
Is there any scope for Statistics somewhere in the plan, half A would be useful.

I did a history degree, worked for a bit after graduation, took an internship that placed me in a law firm and then ended up going to law school and becoming a city lawyer.

Other friends on my course became:

Teacher
Academic
Political consultant and is now Head of Comms for huge companies
Software engineer
Accountant

What I did see at law school however were quite a few people who had lost the desire to become lawyers, having chosen to do an LLB course when they were 16/17, but now felt they had to carry on as they were too far invested now.

Much better for your child to do what they want to at university (within reason) and then get some experience.. they may come back to law but at that point will be more certain it's for them.

DS did history. Hes a digital journalist on the national press now. Works from home in a big northern city.

He did an MA in digital journalism.

A generally good academic degree gives you more choice and avoids early specialisation. Which is good for some. For others it may be better to go a more specialised apprenticeship route or more vocational degree.

No it isn’t or certainly doesn’t have to be. It’s working for McKinsey, Bain, BCG, the Big Four and similar plus niche boutique consultancies. It can be extremely lucrative.

@RefreshingCandour The wealthiest few is a tiny tiny minority and mostly entrepreneurs. Most wealthy leaders of companies have been to uni. They are employees. Of course not all grads get on company schemes. That’s obvious. However they do went career progression, but others are happy doing nothing of the sort.

Going back about 10 yrs I think History was one of the most employable degrees afterwards. I guess that’s because skills are very applicable.
I’d do a degree they were most interested in tbh.

I'd also add @obleek that while history is in the lower half of that table it also ranks more highly than 'useful' subjects like Law. And Biological Sciences which is well clearly STEM.

The degree subject is less relevant than the university. Some will even accept students with a D in the same A-level subject (no mitigating circumstances) in Clearing, just to get bums on seats. Can't be compared to an Oxford, Cambridge or LSE graduate.

I do think that History can be somewhat of a 'default' subject for people who don't know what they want to do. Many are still unsure by the time they graduate, leading to lower earnings if they just take the first job that comes. It would be interesting to see their earnings a decade into their post-degree working lives.

Can I ask why the experience of studying music then making a career in IT and business is something that “haunts” you? It sounds like a great combination of studying something you enjoyed and working in an area that pays well.

People from my year at my Cambridge college who studied history are now:
Partner in management consultancy firm
Partners in law firms
Senior civil servants
TV producer
Barrister (KC)
Former MP and now Director of the V&A
Very senior police officer
Journalist/author and academic
Investment bankers
Senior financier turned MP
The worst Chancellor of the Exchequer in recent history
Architectural historian

I didn’t study history myself but I recently recruited a graduate historian who had done the law conversion recently. I prefer to recruit grads who have not studied law as undergrads and find that historians are really good at research and writing.

Some do, but not many city firms do and those that do don’t take many. My firm doesn’t take apprentices. My husbands has taken two one of which was great one of which was so bad they are considering never taking one again. Not saying I agree with the decision but while it’s technically a possible an apprenticeship certainly isn’t the easier way into city law.

And as I said, a good percentage of the trainees we’ve had in the last few years are history grads.

We are about to start offering 2 apprenticeships per year, set against 30 standard graduate traineeships. The apprenticeships will likely be awarded to candidates who would have found it prohibitive to attend university due to their economic or social background.

Exactly, it’s so you don’t miss out on excellent candidates who couldn’t attend uni for sensible reasons, it’s not the main route - maybe that will change but I doubt it will by the time the OP’s child is looking for jobs.

@Anonymouslyposting yes, if she is 17 now she’d be applying for an apprenticeship next year.

A big 'thank you' to everyone who replied - some really useful insights and commentary....many thanks :-)

@ageratum1

A lot of talk about history grads being ' management consultants'. That is being self employed and hoping you can blag work here and there on the strength of their experience.

By consulting we mean working for finance and management consultancy companies such as the Big 4

There will be people saying they did history and are now a CEO on 6 figures etc but this doesn't give you the full picture.
I'd urge caution unless the degree is from a prestigious university and you're a well off family already.
I did a humanities subject at a mid-ranked uni after similar advice at school about graduate jobs not requiring a specific subject. This is true for some jobs BUT:

-these graduate schemes are mainly in London. Great if you're living there already or can afford to make multiple trips for interviews. And if you're willing to spend more years living in house shares while paying expensive rent. If you want to buy your own home and have a family by 30, that's unlikely to be achievable in London these days due to cost (unless you marry rich or are rich already)

-the graduate schemes are extremely competitive. Most of my cohort got 2:1s, I graduated with a 1st and had work experience. Not one of us got onto a graduate scheme.
You're competing against thousands of graduates from various subjects, many from top 10 universities, many have also gone to private schools and have more confidence/polish/the right accent etc. If it's something in the arts/media then the pay is low initially and you either need a second job or parents to help you out if you're in London.

-if you don't get into a graduate scheme then you need some sort of entry level job, most of these are either very low paid or ask for a specific qualification and experience (often all three). This is the route I and most of my course mates took. Many of us had to do further study to get actual job skills and a qualification for a specific job. This also costs money, on top of the existing student debt.

After over a decade of meandering I'm now in the civil service. I earn about 45k, which I'm happy with as I live in a relatively cheap area. By Mumsnet standards it's not loads though.
I enjoyed my degree but if I had my time again I'd choose a practical degree with placements and a clear career path at the end. This is just my experience though, others may disagree.

One of the most helpful posts I’ve seen on this board, and reflective of reality. Thank you.