Career Escape
Moving from chemist to engineering teachers, postsecondary, by the occupational data
Both occupations are described by the same O*NET 30.3 rating system, which makes them directly comparable: the same requirements, rated for each. What follows is that comparison for chemists and Engineering Teachers, Postsecondary, not an opinion about whether the move is a good idea.
Can a chemist become an engineering teachers, postsecondary?
O*NET 30.3 rates 67% of what matters to either chemist work or engineering teachers, postsecondary work as mattering to both, which is a real overlap with a real remainder. The requirements that carry across include Monitoring and Controlling Resources, Providing Consultation and Advice to Others, Physics. It sits at Job Zone 5 against Job Zone 4 for chemists, which usually means a further credential, a licence, or a longer runway of experience. BLS lists doctoral or professional degree as the typical entry education here, against bachelor's degree for chemists. What would be new concentrates in knowledge: Design, Engineering and Technology, Mechanical. BLS puts the 2025 national median wage for engineering teachers, postsecondarys at $109,270 against $91,240 for chemists, a difference of 20% upward at the occupational level rather than for any individual move. BLS projects employment in the destination occupation to grow 7.8% between 2025 and 2035, with about 3,900 openings a year on average. O*NET describes the destination as follows: Teach courses pertaining to the application of physical laws and principles of engineering for the development of machines, materials, instruments, processes, and services. This compares two occupations, not two people, and says nothing about whether any individual would be hired.
- Weighted overlap
- 67% of the requirements important to either occupation are important to both, with 2 of those shared requirements classed as distinctive rather than near-universal.
- Preparation level
- O*NET Job Zone 5, against Job Zone 4 for chemists. Typically 2 levels of further education.
- Typical entry education (BLS)
- Doctoral or professional degree, against Bachelor's degree for chemists.
- Prior experience typically expected
- None, with no on-the-job training category assigned.
- Where the overlap is strongest
- Knowledge, with 2 distinctive requirements important to both. Requirements that carry over include Monitoring and Controlling Resources, Providing Consultation and Advice to Others, Physics.
- Independent corroboration
- O*NET does not list this as directly related to the source occupation; it appears one step out, related to a related occupation. The overlap measure and the relatedness file disagree here, and both are shown rather than one being quietly dropped.
Source and method
O*NET 30.3 Database, with BLS Employment Projections Table 5.4. Verified 2026-09-02. Importance ratings, Job Zones and occupational titles are read from O*NET. Typical entry education, prior experience and on-the-job training are read from BLS. The weighted overlap percentage, the distinctive-requirement counts, and the shared and new requirement lists are computed by RoleSprint from those inputs using the method published at /career-change/methodology.
Career transition data
Chemist to Engineering Teachers, Postsecondary
- Work activities overlapderived
- 68%
- Knowledge overlapderived
- 55%
- Transferable skills overlapderived
- 64%
- Essential skills overlapderived
- 100%
- Job Zone
- 4 to 5
- Median annual wage, 2025
- $91,240 to $109,270
- Wage differencederived
- +$18,030 (+20%)
- Projected employment change, 2025–35
- +7.8%
- Annual openings, 2025–35 average
- 3,900
- Typical entry education
- Doctoral or professional degree
Largest transferable capability: Computers and Electronics
Largest new demand: Engineering and Technology
Source. Job Zone and requirement ratings: O*NET 30.3. Wage, employment projections, openings and entry education: BLS Employment Projections Table 1.2, projections 2025–35, wage year 2025. RoleSprint-derived. Overlap percentages and the wage difference are calculated by RoleSprint from those published values. Limitation. These are national occupational statistics for two occupations. The wage figure is not a salary you would be offered, employment growth is not job security, and overlap is not a likelihood of being hired. Fields BLS does not publish for an occupation are omitted rather than estimated.
What carries over
Requirements O*NET rates as important for both chemists and engineering teachers, postsecondarys, by domain. Most distinctive first, so the top of each list is the part that is actually worth putting on a resume.
Work activities
25 of 31 work activities important to either occupation are important to both.
- Monitoring and Controlling Resources3.0 for chemists, 3.1 here
- Providing Consultation and Advice to Others3.0 for chemists, 3.7 here
- Coaching and Developing Others3.1 for chemists, 4.0 here
- Developing Objectives and Strategies3.2 for chemists, 3.9 here
- Estimating the Quantifiable Characteristics of Products, Events, or Information3.6 for chemists, 3.7 here
Knowledge
7 of 12 knowledge areas important to either occupation are important to both.
- Physics3.1 for chemists, 4.2 here
- Chemistry4.9 for chemists, 3.2 here
- Production and Processing3.5 for chemists, 3.1 here
- Computers and Electronics3.4 for chemists, 4.5 here
- Mathematics3.8 for chemists, 4.5 here
Transferable skills
8 of 10 transferable skills important to either occupation are important to both.
- Instructing3.0 for chemists, 4.1 here
- Systems Evaluation3.1 for chemists, 3.1 here
- Systems Analysis3.1 for chemists, 3.1 here
- Social Perceptiveness3.0 for chemists, 3.0 here
- Complex Problem Solving3.6 for chemists, 3.3 here
Essential skills
10 of 10 essential skills important to either occupation are important to both.
- Science4.1 for chemists, 3.5 here
- Mathematics3.8 for chemists, 3.9 here
- Learning Strategies3.0 for chemists, 4.1 here
- Writing3.8 for chemists, 3.9 here
- Active Learning3.6 for chemists, 3.6 here
Numbers are O*NET Importance, on a 1 to 5 scale. A requirement counts as important at 3.0 and above, which is the threshold the whole comparison uses.
What would be new
Requirements important for engineering teachers, postsecondarys and not important for chemists. This is the part you would have to be able to evidence, and it is usually the real obstacle rather than the job title.
Work activities
2 work activities rated important here and not for chemists.
- Guiding, Directing, and Motivating Subordinates3.5 here, 2.9 for chemists
- Communicating with People Outside the Organization3.5 here, 2.9 for chemists
Knowledge
4 knowledge areas rated important here and not for chemists.
- Design4.6 here, 2.1 for chemists
- Engineering and Technology5.0 here, 3.0 for chemists
- Mechanical3.5 here, 2.7 for chemists
- Education and Training3.8 here, 2.7 for chemists
Practical caveats for this move
Specific to this pair, and worth reading before treating any of the above as a plan.
- The preparation gap is real: Engineering Teachers, Postsecondary sits a Job Zone above chemists, and Job Zone differences usually show up as a licence or a credential rather than as extra experience. Check the licensing rules in your state before anything else.
- BLS records no prior experience in a related occupation as typical for this role, which makes the requirement lists above the more useful guide to what a posting will ask for.
- O*NET does not list this destination as directly related to your current occupation. It reached this map through the requirement overlap, one step out. That is a weaker corroboration than a directly related occupation, and it is shown rather than hidden.
- None of this accounts for licensing, geography, pay, hiring volume, or whether you would want the work. Occupational data describes the job. It does not describe the market for it, and it does not describe you.
How this move compares with the alternatives
This page is one move. The Opportunity Atlas puts every destination mapped from chemists side by side on skills overlap, day-to-day work, wage, projected growth, openings and the size of the training step.
It does not rank them, because the dimensions genuinely disagree: measured across every transition published here, how much your skills carry over and how much your knowledge carries over are close to unrelated. You choose which one matters and it orders by that.
Compare the alternatives in the Opportunity AtlasThe destination occupation, as O*NET describes it
Teach courses pertaining to the application of physical laws and principles of engineering for the development of machines, materials, instruments, processes, and services. Includes teachers of subjects such as chemical, civil, electrical, industrial, mechanical, mineral, and petroleum engineering. Includes both teachers primarily engaged in teaching and those who do a combination of teaching and research.
O*NET-SOC 25-1032.00. Full title: Engineering Teachers, Postsecondary. Where this page uses the shorter phrase “engineering teachers, postsecondary”, that is a common name for readability, not a separate occupational classification.
This page includes information from the O*NET 30.3 Database by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (USDOL/ETA). Used under the CC BY 4.0 license. O*NET® is a trademark of USDOL/ETA. RoleSprint has modified all or some of this information. USDOL/ETA has not approved, endorsed, or tested these modifications. Analysis generated 2026-09-02 from the O*NET 30.3 Database. Entry education, work experience, and on-the-job training are reproduced from BLS Employment Projections Table 5.4, Education and training assignments by detailed occupation, 2024, published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
What to do next
Occupational data compares two jobs. It cannot tell you whether one specific employer would consider you, and this is the point where most people stop reading data and start applying blind.