Biochemistry is a proven discipline whose employment stats are more likely to be tied in with the economic cycles. What we are talking about are majors that have persistent low to poor employment stats independent of economic cycles, something like Philosophy or Liberal Arts, or when we mock someone about his/her education: Underwater Basketweaving. So ultimately, the elimination of a major is a serious event because the decision is usually preceded by years of observation and analysis. Once the major is eliminated, so will those who have been teaching it. Many of these that are deemed to be worthless are developed by those who majored in something else. For US and many of our universities, particularly very socially 'liberal' ones, the dubious majors involved Gay and Lesbian studies, for example.
in China, the "worst" degrees are not what they are in the West. Obviously, Philosophy and Liberal arts are not too hot, but Clinical Medicine, Physics, Applied Math, Biotechnology and Law are also on the list of highest unemployment.
2010½ì±¾¿Æ±ÏÒµÉúʧҵÂÊ×î¸ß10´óרҵ_ÐÂÀ˽ÌÓý_ÐÂÀËÍø
Obviously, you can't say that Physics, Clinical Medicine and Applied Math are more worthless than Philosophy, but what happens is, many schools produce far too many Physics, Applied Math, Medicine, etc. majors, more than the market need. This stems from the command economy days.
I actually pity the Biotech and Clinical Medicine people the most.
The liberal arts people can go into publishing, education, journalism, advertisements, financial services, etc.
The physics and applied math people can go into alot of different types of engineering. I myself learned physics and was in pharmaceuticals. Others who were better at E/M than I was went into telecom or computer hardware. The math guys can do software.
The biology guys just know biology and that's it.