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.

@PumpkinKnitter I do think linguists can do very well because they have a variety of skills and have had the year abroad. I always think adding a mfl to history gives an extra dimension too. My DD1,did MFL and it didn’t hold her back either but she planned her job strategy and did everything she could to get what she wanted.

I think there’s a huge problem listening to some teachers who have quite narrow views on degrees and little work experience. It’s not broad advice for a career. It’s narrow advice for a degree.

Chartered Accountant here. I went the apprenticeship type route but my four FCA qualified best mates did degrees in Geography, Philosophy, Physics and Accounting. So, I can't see any reason History wouldn't fit too!

@saltinecrackers Excellent points. DD1 was pressured by her school to go to uni because she was capable of getting into a RG. Interestingly 11 years later they are now actively pushing apprenticeships as an alternative to uni. (Pressurising DD1 was pointless - she has always known her own mind!)

DD2 didn’t make use of the careers service at uni, but she did have the benefit of DD1’s recruitment experience and CV skills. She also put in a lot of homework on companies before making job applications and at every stage of the application process. I can see why they are so advantageous for most students who don’t have their own personal recruitment coach.

DD3’s final choice of uni (Edinburgh) was made in part because of its international and research reputation as she is considering a research career.

@TizerorFizz I agree MFL can be a very good foundation and that a year abroad is very much a plus. I think the ability to plan and be proactive in trying to nail a graduate job is almost more important than degree subject. Getting a job while in Sixth Form or at uni can help there too. DD3 had quite a struggle finding a weekend job and learned a lot of lessons about persistence and proactivity in the process, along with getting useful interview experience.

@PumpkinKnitter DD didn’t in 6th form but whilst at university she was chair of a ball committee and a MFL society. She volunteered for the NT in the uni holidays and was able to find some paid work experience which was directly relevant to her career. With an August birthday, she was always the last to be old enough to do anything and that included driving! We don’t have a bus here so she waited until she was 18 and could drive. However she was proactive in doing useful things.

@TizerorFizz I think it is the proactivity that makes such a difference.

@TizerorFizz the "point" of a supermarket job at university is money. Many of us have to pay our own way so cannot afford to volunteer or intern.

I had to work every holiday at university in order to make it to the new term with my overdraft paid off. I got £200 in cash from my dad the day he dropped me off at university and that was it.

Now when I assess grad applications I am very alive to the life skills that sort of work has given to grads as well as the more "relevant" stuff experinced by applicants who were able to do voluntary work or internships as they were financially supported by their parents.

My friend did classics and history at an RG and she’s now a top PR person earning bucket loads. The degree’s reputation got her into work placements and internships and that’s what built her career.

I think that’s the key too. Many young people we know have honestly believed their degree would be good enough without any other work or relevant experience on the cv. For some brilliant dc, it might not matter but for many it’s important.

We have lots of friends and relatives who truly believed the degree was enough because in their day it was. However they haven’t factored in the large number of degree holders entering the workforce and the competition for many jobs. So many we know have taken up to a year to get any work at all. Other than a bit of casual work. This even included someone with a 2:2 degree in maths from Cambridge. No one wants a 2:2. The parents thought the mere mention of Cambridge would open doors but the 2:2 caused huge problems. This young person has now found a great job playing to their strengths but quite a few others we know just have pretty dead end jobs and need to work out how to use them as a launchpad to something better even after a masters degree. The other unfortunate issue is unless there’s a bank of mum and dad, owning a property is not likely either.

@Ginmonkeyagain That is unfortunate but doesn’t make that person better at the graduate level job. Many young people we know have not had to work at all. They should do something. I’m not advocating doing nothing. However some careers really won’t be interested in the work in a supermarket.

It’s also interesting in that I come from an era when everyone got full grants if parents didn’t have any money. As my siblings did. They didn’t need to work. One did though to pay for holidays. One never did and didn’t get a job for 5 years after graduating. I’ve certainly known parents who won’t give their students what they should (my DH) and DH therefore worked in the holidays. However the work was 100% relevant to his career. I think there needs to be a balance between work and cv. My DN just “works” but couldn’t get a job with her science degree. So now it’s more work to pay for the masters. Feels like a treadmill.

Also many internships pay. They are not all voluntary. Some last just a short amount of time leaving plenty of time to work elsewhere. As we discussed above, perseverance is important in whatever route you take.

Hmm you think what you want to.

I actually recruit for grad and apprenticeship schemes and my comment was in one case the fact this candidate had had this job tipped the balance for me (they also had other experience and a good academic record).

So you know it can happen.

@saltinecrackers My experience of careers support at uni was very similar to your DH's. I didn't even know it was possible to get help with the scheme applications and hadn't ever met anyone who'd been on one, so I was totally clueless.
Another poster said these were the easiest jobs you'd ever get - not if you've never had experience of these types of applications, no one's ever "coached" you and you're a 22 year old who's only ever worked in cafes and bars where they don't even ask for a proper CV.
No one from my course even got past the online assessments. They want you to do a timed maths test but if you're humanities graduate you wouldn't have done any maths for years.
So maybe it's not so much the subject you study but the careers support the uni offers.

I think the experiences being shared by recruiters in this thread demonstrate that individuals do recruit in their own image or in line with their own prejudices and preferences. However, graduate entry opportunities can get thousands of applicants, therefore, increasingly, the CVs the hiring managers see will have been pre-sifted by AI, or by an agency, or by HR, or all three. Getting past that first hurdle can be the difficulty, especially if you don't know its there.

I think it's a really good degree.

@obleek There are many smaller companies who will not have AI and will not need to sift very much. DH’s consultancy was never flooded with applicants but working in a supermarket would never have made someone more employable because competency in their line of professional work would mean a lot more. There’s always people whose parents didn’t cough up the money when they were assessed to pay but that’s not relevant to employability. DH didn’t get the money either because his parents wanted a new car and caravan. That doesn’t mean he chose staff in his own image.

Ah it was me that said it was the 'easiest' and yes, with the proviso you are coached through. Which led to the same point you're making, the quality of the university is more important, not the degree subject.

Another poster said these were the easiest jobs you'd ever get - not if you've never had experience of these types of applications, no one's ever "coached" you and you're a 22 year old who's only ever worked in cafes and bars where they don't even ask for a proper CV.
No one from my course even got past the online assessments. They want you to do a timed maths test but if you're humanities graduate you wouldn't have done any maths for years.
So maybe it's not so much the subject you study but the careers support the uni offers.

@JellyOnAPlateJellyOffThePlate surely information and guidance about CVs, applications and maths practice is available to everyone on the internet and in books?

I did history at uni and now I am International Finance Manager for a very big Int Company, The degree has lots of transferable skills such as analysis, report writing and problem solving which are skills this kind of role values. However saying this, I would say if I had the chance again I would study law as required same kind of skills as a degree plus a guaranteed profession.

@Secondstart1001 You are completely wrong about studying law. Around 18000 students take law every year. Around 400 to 500 barristers get pupilage every year and there are around 6000 who are training to be solicitors following their degree each year. What you have not factored in, is that around half of these will not have a law degree. They might have studied classics, history, MFL, music, English etc. Many will be later starters because they have failed to get a training contract or pupilage earlier in their career. Absolutely nothing is guaranteed with a law degree and the lower the prestige of the university, even less.

@TizerorFizz thank you for the info but yes for me from a personal perspective wished I’d trained as a solicitor! It’s such an interesting field!

@Secondstart1001 My DD is friends with barristers who did history degrees. It’s not a barrier to being a solicitor or barrister. DD is a barrister and didn’t study for a law degree. It’s actually good that other attributes are considered.

Well, not having the common sense to even Google 'CV tips', 'video interviews' etc is one thing. But, even with the advice, many don't have the verbal/linguistic skills to polish it to an extremely high standard. And some things like interviews really need personal feedback from a third party. It's hard to see ourselves as others see us. Generic 'information and guidance' isn't always helpful and actually, can be very confusing with contradictory tips posted online! A personalised advisor will be able to put it in context.

That's why even adults in professional jobs get help. There are CV writers/coaches specialising in certain fields but most people just lean on their professional network and ask for a bit of advice.

Furthermore, the issue with the online tests isn't always the arithmetic skills needed to pass. It's the deliberately confusing wording of the questions, that's why practice tests are beneficial.

I'm not saying that it's impossible for someone to DIY, getting everything from the internet but it puts them at quite a disadvantage. The chances of getting through are lower, unless they happen to be naturally very good at these things. It's quite short-sighted to pretend otherwise, and the blame lies squarely on the university for not preparing their graduates sufficiently.

Last time I looked Universities did not have any obligation to prepare students for work at all. They’re academic institutions. Surely it’s just a bonus if any of them offer that service?

I’m sure practice maths tests are available online and in books.

I do sometimes set exercises and assess candidates for graduate recruitment. I really don’t buy that you can’t do well in a grad scheme application without spoon feeding and endless mocks. Diversity and social mobility targets oblige employers to be on their guard for over-coached applicants. However, as you said, being able to find publicly-available resources and separate good advice from bad is the mark of someone with the right skills for the job.

I also assess candidates for graduate recruitment, and it really depends on your firm but mine is very structured and rigid. There's also things like AI being used to assess video interviews and CV's. Personally I think it's all very mechanical. While I've managed to have a good chat with the ones who reach me, at the final interview stage I often think of the many more who didn't make it just because they didn't know how to 'game' the process. But, I guess HR has to cut down upon the thousands of applicants somehow, especially as we a) sponsor visas and b) offer permanent contracts. Our schemes are very desirable.

Also if you read my post carefully, I never said that you 'can't' do well without spoon-feeding. The probability is lower. Practice making one better is a logical assumption. You only see those in front of you, you wouldn't know how many never made it to that stage because they didn't 'quite fit' what the automated processes were looking for. It's a big debate actually in the world of AI filtering.

Also, you're wrong about the purpose of universities - in 2024 UK. I made this point in another thread. They should be academic institutions. But aren't always. For a start, some accept students with a D in the subject of the degree in Clearing, no mitigating circumstances etc. Just to get bums on seats. And the amount of watered down syllabuses I have seen... don't get me started. But schools get kudos for sending students to university, people see it as 'prestigious' and more importantly, the universities make money!

Students these days pay so much and get fleeced by everyone. The university, student landlords, etc. If they're paying that much and neither being academically challenged nor being prepared for work, what's the point of them? All the academic universities offer these services it is clearly part of the proposition, their graduates are both academic and career ready. Others offer neither. Many young people are now waking up to this and choosing other paths.

We used to have a clear purpose for university and a clear purpose for other post-secondary educational pathways, but everyone is now shoved into university, with the resulting devaluation of degrees.

Also @TimeandMotion your point about 'diversity and social mobility' actually contradicts what you said about universities offering career assistance. It is students from disadvantaged backgrounds, who benefit from all this.

Firstly, you're constantly emphasizing 'spoon-feeding' and 'over-coaching'. You also picked on maths tests. But you conveniently ignored my point about feedback from a third party regarding CVs and interviews! It's very easy for a middle-class student with professional parents to have them give the CV a one-over or do some interview practice. I wouldn't call this 'over-coaching'. Just getting some tips. 'Over-coaching' would be helping them with tailored CVs for each job, practicing before every interview etc.

According to you, universities shouldn't offer any resources. So those who have the financial means and connections can get help. Everyone else has to make their own way.

Secondly, many people especially neurodiverse candidates may be excellent at the job, but bad at interviewing. It's quite disablist of you to assume that being unable to separate good advice from bad, in this context means that they don't have the skills for the job. They'll benefit from extra help!

I'm starting to doubt actually that you work in an inclusive company, or even one with standardised hiring practices because, like I said this isn't just about graduates. In the professional world, people get advice from their mentors, their network, etc. That's why we have employee resource groups, and why networking is a valuable professional skill. Nobody is expected to do it all on their own and a big part of inclusion is providing the resources and means, not pretending that they don't help at all.