Re: University entry : Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:50 pm  

The Video Ref wrote:

Agreed. Especially in the first year. The 'university experience' generally means getting blasted out of your skull on cheap vodka 4 nights a week, staying in bed until early afternoon and, very occasionally, doing just enough academic study to prevent yourself getting thrown off the course.

Again, not on all courses. I have 25 hours of lectures a week, along with labs which can be up to 10 hours. It's also necessary to put in around 20 hours personal study along with on average 2 assignments and 1 lab report each week.

The sweeping generalisation you make is the socially the perceived view on students but not often accurate. Of course some courses which require less work load and some people will indeed live like this during university life. However, that is reflected in the value of their qualifications post graduation.

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:23 am  

DaveO wrote:

Can you give me an example of an employer asking for a degree qualification for a mundane job and even if you can are you suggesting this is the norm?

Yes, my own eldest daughter for instance, she has a 2.1 law degree and gained a job at a legal administrators office, which in effect is an admin job. Its ok because that's what she wanted, not every law student wants to be Perry Mason but its fair to say that a law degree was not totally necessary for the job, but it was necessary to be considered for the job.

No, the misconception is that you think this in the first place. Why do you think graduate training schemes are call "training schemes"? Employers such as say M&S know a graduate in English or the Classics for example won't know anything about the retail sector but they take them on because of what their ability to get a degree says about them.

My opinion is formed from a time, not so long ago, when "training schemes" were the only way to recruit new employees and employers actually had to invest some money into training new employees, not always over five years but for those jobs that required a nationally recognised qualification then a five year commitment to the employee was an absolute from the employer.

It worked.

Of course it came off the profit margin, but it worked.

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 7:25 am  

Dally wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2203987/Two-E-grades-A-level-let-study-degree-desperate-universities-try-courses.html

How can two E's at A level be adequate to enable entry to any meaningful university course in law or architecture? The country has gone mad.

"E's" what?

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 7:38 am  

McLaren_Field wrote:

Yes, my own eldest daughter for instance, she has a 2.1 law degree and gained a job at a legal administrators office, which in effect is an admin job. Its ok because that's what she wanted, not every law student wants to be Perry Mason but its fair to say that a law degree was not totally necessary for the job, but it was necessary to be considered for the job.

My opinion is formed from a time, not so long ago, when "training schemes" were the only way to recruit new employees and employers actually had to invest some money into training new employees, not always over five years but for those jobs that required a nationally recognised qualification then a five year commitment to the employee was an absolute from the employer.

It worked.

Of course it came off the profit margin, but it worked.

Absolutely spot on.

Employers have been advertising jobs – and demanding you be a graduate, even if the job does not require a degree – for some years now. Couple that with the continuing demand of employers that young people should leave school perfectly trained for the workplace (regardless of what the workplace is): I remember, not that long ago, complaints from the CBI (I think) that people left school with no knowledge of customer relations. Well no – that's not what school is for.

Add in to that the moves to increase tertiary education – the same has happened in other countries too (see Ha-Joon Chang) – and you are inevitably going to end up with so-called pointless degrees.

[Kosh]

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:10 am  

The Video Ref wrote:

Agreed. Especially in the first year. The 'university experience' generally means getting blasted out of your skull on cheap vodka 4 nights a week, staying in bed until early afternoon and, very occasionally, doing just enough academic study to prevent yourself getting thrown off the course.

My son just started a Physics degree at Birmingham. He'll have neither the time nor the money to behave as you suggest.

Maybe you should research some facts and not just believe the negative spin put out by the media?

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:15 am  

Kosh wrote:

My son just started a Physics degree at Birmingham. He'll have neither the time nor the money to behave as you suggest.

Maybe you should research some facts and not just believe the negative spin put out by the media?

My niece did fine art at Leeds College of Art and she had masses of tutorials and lectures, plus she had a massive amount of work to produce. Combined with part time work (when she could get it), it's a myth, as you say.

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:36 am  

Mintball wrote:

... Add in to that the moves to increase tertiary education – the same has happened in other countries too (see Ha-Joon Chang) ...

If one was being cynical, one could suggest that the decision to increase university education, coupled with the end of grants and the introduction and growth of fees, which commenced at the same time as apprenticeships were dumped, was a perfect way to develop education as one of those service 'industries' that was going to have to replace the old ones that were being dumped.

[DaveO]

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:41 am  

Mintball wrote:

Employers have been advertising jobs – and demanding you be a graduate, even if the job does not require a degree – for some years now.

What do you mean by the job "does not require" a degree? Entry into certain parts of the Civil Service have always required a degree presumably because the assumption is if you get one you are going to be of a certain level of intelligence and ability. There is no specific degree you need to do for this but they want graduates. Having a degree in order to be considered for a job is not a new idea. If you are saying Tesco want degree qualified check out operatives that is different but certain jobs and careers have always required a degree even if not in a specific subject.

Couple that with the continuing demand of employers that young people should leave school perfectly trained for the workplace (regardless of what the workplace is): I remember, not that long ago, complaints from the CBI (I think) that people left school with no knowledge of customer relations. Well no – that's not what school is for.

It isn't what a Universality education is for either.

The CBI have been complaining for decades about education at all levels not equipping school leavers to graduates for work. This is also not new.

Add in to that the moves to increase tertiary education – the same has happened in other countries too (see Ha-Joon Chang) – and you are inevitably going to end up with so-called pointless degrees.

I would argue a degree is only pointless if it lacks academic rigour. In fact I would say if there is a problem with degree level education it is the fact that many of the degrees that are vocational lead to false expectations of a job being there at the end of it. Those who decry degree level study in non-vocational subjects just do not get it.

If the CBI or anyone else want degrees to really be apprenticeships then they need to do something about it rather than whinge and they need to provide the jobs at the end.

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:31 am  

DaveO wrote:

What do you mean by the job "does not require" a degree? ...

I mean that I remember reading job descriptions in the late 1980s and early 1990s for work that would easily have been within my abilities and experience, but which required a graduate.

DaveO wrote:

... Having a degree in order to be considered for a job is not a new idea ...

I hadn't been intending to suggest that it was. But it has expanded massively since 1980.

DaveO wrote:

It isn't what a Universality education is for either.

See my next response.

DaveO wrote:

The CBI have been complaining for decades about education at all levels not equipping school leavers to graduates for work. This is also not new.

Indeed. But I'd suggest that going so far as to whinge that young people are not leaving school knowing about something as specific to business as 'customer relations' is going further than generalised complaints about literacy and numeracy. And it suggests a desire to see major changes to school curricula to change them simply into places to fit people for work within those businesses rather than providing any wider sense of 'education'.

DaveO wrote:

I would argue a degree is only pointless if it lacks academic rigour. In fact I would say if there is a problem with degree level education it is the fact that many of the degrees that are vocational lead to false expectations of a job being there at the end of it. Those who decry degree level study in non-vocational subjects just do not get it.

I agree – to a point. There are also degrees that are, frankly, daft. The trend toward 'journalism' degrees is a case in point.

In the olden days (not that long ago) you learnt on the job. The skills you need have not changed much, except to add IT skills for page make up etc.

But I have worked with reporters who would be excluded from journalism by such a demand – yet were good reporters who could find good stories etc. It was part of my skill set to turn what they came up with into good English and the relevant 'house style'.

If someone fancies a career in journalism – and wants to go to university, then do a degree in history or medicine, law or literature: in other words, something that will give you an area of expertise that you can then bring to the journalistic world. A good, basic education is more than enough for journalism itself.

DaveO wrote:

If the CBI or anyone else want degrees to really be apprenticeships then they need to do something about it rather than whinge and they need to provide the jobs at the end.

Agreed.

Re: University entry : Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:21 pm  

As a recent graduate i.e. this July i find it crazy that people will go to University anymore. I was "lucky" to pay the £3,200 fees, if i was say my younger brother who will be going to University next year i wouldnt consider it in the slightest.
It astonished me that they let the cap rise to £9,000 and that universities would be allowed to set their own fees rather than have an independent board look at their achievements and their succession into full time jobs after graduation. This is a must for anyone going to University at the moment, clear out all the bullshit they'll give you about the course and what not and get down to the nitty gritty of how many students have got jobs in the field they wanted in the last year etc. I didnt go to a red-brick university, i went to a small university in Leeds mainly because of the course and detailed discussion with lecturers and the abilty to befriend lecturers and have extra guidance when needed, which is something im indebted to them for.
My university has over 90% of graduates in further study or working which i found phenomenal. Im currently waiting on a contract to start work myself in my chosen field whilst working an apprenticeship for another website until i start my new job. In my university it was a non negotiable requirement to complete 6 weeks placement. I dont know how it is elsewhere but this was something i found to be fantastically rewarding and a big thing to put on my CV and something employers WILL look for. Teaching students are out on placement for a much larger chunk of time. My course was very much essay driven and exams mixed in every now and again. I hate it when people say that essays are easier and exams test you more. I have learnt so much more from my essays than i have remembered for exams. I was challenged in my essays, i guess some institutions do not challenge their students enough maybe?

Putting people through University on 80 points is something that makes me angry in a way. I worked hard through my A Levels, i didnt get the grades i wanted and knew i had to step up at Uni. I cannot imagine people with 2 E's having the motivation/desire to do this. Leeds Met is struggling, big time for cash. bad decisions has pretty much red flagged them to authorities. They are now charging £8,500 which for me knowing Leeds Met (pretty well) is horrifying. My lectures contained no more than 40 people at a time, often half that. Leeds Met's lectures can often contain double that sometimes more. The one on one time with lecturers must be non existent.

Outside of lectures and reading time i worked a part time job on weekends but still went out and had a good time. It wasnt the weekly alcohol filled parties culminating in throwing up outside a kebab shop on a wednesday evening after having the afternoon off downing pints of high percentage cider that people often have as a stereotype for students these days. It was a once or twice a week thing for me. I knew people who were in the other category of people and they seemed happy doing that. Expect many horror stories coming from Freshers Weeks' in the media over the next 2 weeks however.

I loved my University time, i worked hard and earned my degree. I had a good time out of University and will hopefully be in a job come the end of this year in my chosen field. I'm happy for Leeds Met to let people in with 2 E's if they want but morally i think its wrong. University is still a challenge but the rewards are drastically falling from grace.