I always hear pieces of the ongoing argument regarding the hard sciences vs. the social sciences. Based on personal experience, I can say it is far more difficult and time-consuming to be an engineer. I am a computer engineering major with a minor in political science. I feel I can make this argument because I’ve been in both types of classes.
Social scientists often complain about the difficulty of their majors. For instance, there are a large number of people who think it is hard to be an economics or a psychology major. They think that courses such as the ECON 120 sequence are so hard and time-consuming. What bothers me most is that they think these classes are comparable to engineering classes. These complaints sound petty to me. I don’t think that the classes are really comparable. Engineers have the really hard courses and, in general, the harder curriculum.
I agree that certain social science classes may be competitive, in that it is hard to earn an A, but it is in no way as challenging or time consuming as a serious engineering course.
I want to make it clear: At UCSD, the engineers prevail. The academic difficulty level for engineers far exceeds the difficulty level of any social science major. Engineers spend more time on their classes than most social scientists.
A social scientist just reads and writes. A social scientist rarely has to retain knowledge from an earlier course to do well in a course that follows. Most social science majors are just extensions of history with a touch of criticism and argument. As long as you know how to write and you keep up with the material, you can pass a social science class.
For an engineer, the material from prerequisite courses really determines the outcome of your future classes. For instance, how can you do well in Physics 2D without having ever taken Physics 2A? How can you do well in Math 21D without having ever take Math 20A? How can you code a compiler without knowing what a data structure is?
If I had to rank academic difficulty, engineers have the hardest curriculum at UCSD. The hard science majors, such as bio and chemistry, have a curriculum with medium difficulty. Last, the social scientists, such as economics and political science majors, have the easiest time. I consider the curriculum of other majors such as economics or political science to be trivially difficult compared with science or engineering majors.
Let’s compare some department curriculum requirements in terms of numbers. Let’s not consider general education requirements. Economics majors are required to take roughly 17 courses. Political science majors are required to take 16 courses. Biology majors have to take between 22 and 27 courses for their major. Computer engineers are required to take more than 35 courses. Bioengineers are required to take more than 40 courses to graduate. Do the math. Do you social scientists see the difference? Why do you complain?
It takes 180 units (45 classes) to graduate. Social scientists have enough time left over for things called electives. Most of the social scientists actually have to take electives in order to hit 180 units. Social scientists have time to pursue minors or double majors. It is even possible for a social science major to graduate in three years.
Most of the engineers do not take electives, unless it is for fun. It is highly unlikely for an engineer to graduate in three years due to the curriculum requirements.
As a result of the easier curriculum, social science majors get to have more time and a more relaxed schedules. If social science majors were required to take more than 30 classes for their majors, I suppose I wouldn’t be ranting about this issue.
In my opinion, the difficulty level of a social science major and that of an engineering major are not even comparable. The curriculum alone highlights why it is harder to be an engineer and easier to be a social scientist.
I know a lot of you social scientists think differently and might be a little outraged. Let me know your opinion so we can print it. Send a comment to the editor.
