Why does the average person go to uni these days?

OP

Original post by halfoflessthan50p

I think its a bit sad that nobody has mentioned that somebody might want to go to university for other reasons than career yet.

In my original post, when classifying "an average person" I did mention people who weren't passionate about a particular subject. With many of the people I've met who've been to uni, I honestly have had trouble believing they really, really like whatever they've been studying, so much that they'd have done their degree even if university wasn't something that so many people do it's like a rite of passage. How many true intellectuals are there?

Of course they'll be some people who are passionate about what they're studying but how many students are like this?

When I dropped out of my history course, one of my self-justifying reasons at the time was if I'm interested in history then I can always read it in my own time, why do I have to do a degree in it?

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 41

Gwasgray

OP

Original post by halfoflessthan50p

I don't know if anyone reads David Michell's column in the guardian but he put it much better than I ever could...

Thanks for the link to that article but the thing is David Mitchell isn't exactly an average bloke is he? Also he went to Cambridge.

Thing is though in that column he describes university as "Three years spent away from home, slightly studying but mainly making friends and mistakes, and working out new philosophies of life at 2am with the help of a wine box, is a time-honoured way of preparing young people for life."

His column echoes what Will Self said in the first episode of Grumpy Old Men, that nowadays young people are too concerning with getting a career and paying off their student loans and that he thought university should be a time for staying up til 2am discussing the meaning of life. I'm not that's really the best argument for going to uni.

When I was young I used to think going to university was about being a scholar in a subject, that a degree made you an expert in something. Now it seems it's only like a standard level of western education.

Reply 42

ilickbatteries

15

Probably because a university degree opens doors.

Even if its from a middling university, if you have a degree you have something extra in your locker.

Reply 43

ilickbatteries

15

Original post by Gwasgray

Thanks for the link to that article but the thing is David Mitchell isn't exactly an average bloke is he? Also he went to Cambridge.

Thing is though in that column he describes university as "Three years spent away from home, slightly studying but mainly making friends and mistakes, and working out new philosophies of life at 2am with the help of a wine box, is a time-honoured way of preparing young people for life."

His column echoes what Will Self said in the first episode of Grumpy Old Men, that nowadays young people are too concerning with getting a career and paying off their student loans and that he thought university should be a time for staying up til 2am discussing the meaning of life. I'm not that's really the best argument for going to uni.

When I was young I used to think going to university was about being a scholar in a subject, that a degree made you an expert in something. Now it seems it's only like a standard level of western education.

I read an article in some newspaper about graduates complaining about getting a job.

"Degrees are the new A-Levels" they said.

Reply 44

Gwasgray

OP

Original post by ilickbatteries

"Degrees are the new A-Levels" they said.

This contradicts your first post.

Reply 45

MagicNMedicine

20

Original post by halfoflessthan50p

I think its a bit sad that nobody has mentioned that somebody might want to go to university for other reasons than career yet.

And you shouldn't measure your success in live versus you friends by comparing salaries :s-smilie:

You might call it pissing about for 3 years but I don't necessarily see anything wrong with taking a few years out to do something you enjoy. What's the massive rush to climb up the career ladder? You're probably going to be spending 40 years of your life working.

I don't know if anyone reads David Michell's column in the guardian but he put it much better than I ever could...

"Three years spent away from home, slightly studying but mainly making friends and mistakes, and working out new philosophies of life at 2am with the help of a wine box, is a time-honoured way of preparing young people for life. After wasting so much of their time at school, society finally lets them waste some of it themselves as part of learning how to make good use of it"

I can see an argument for someone furthering themselves through education and spending three years doing a course that they enjoy, but some students give the impression that they have gone to uni for the social life and chance to get wasted every night, with the academic work being an occupational annoyance (hence their attendance at lectures is sporadic, they do their work rushed in the last weekend before hand in etc).

In some cases it's the middle class version of dole dossing but seen as more acceptable, eg if a council estate kid who left school at 16 wants to spend 3 years drinking and smoking weed with his mates in his flat until 2am in the morning whilst on the dole, that's seen as being a dosser, but if a middle class kid goes off to do that at uni it's seen as 'gaining life experience'

I'm not knocking socialising at uni, I did a lot of it, but I could never understand the students who went round saying stuff like "nobody works in 1st year, it doesn't count anyway so what's the point" and "you can resit the exam but you can't resit the party", if we had mid term tests which were non-assessed you'd get people who just didn't bother working for them because they had the view that "it doesn't count so why revise?". If you're at uni thinking that the academic side is an occupational annoyance that you have to minimise, then you're getting into debt unnecessarily.

Reply 46

nulli tertius

21

Original post by TheSownRose

and to generate more economy - places like Exeter and Keele survive on the money that students bring in.

Yes, but it does massively distort the population demographics. Effectively around 40% of the brightest and best 18 year olds leave their home towns and a lot never return. For Exeter and the like that doesn't matter because they ship in many more 18 year olds from elsewhere. However, cities like Peterborough and towns like Hastings and Dewsbury and Berwick simply lose 18 year olds and don't replace them. Those people who left simply don't go back when they graduate.

This wasn't a noticeable problem when fewer than 10% of the population went to university but now it skews retail and leisure provision. Wander through Peterborough on a Tuesday or Wednesday evening and it is virtually a ghost town.

Reply 47

Ice_Queen

17

Because you're told you should. My college, once I told them I wasn't going to university, lost all interest in what I was doing.

I later changed my mind, but it still stung.

And no, you don't need a degree to do well.

Reply 48

River85

17

Original post by Gwasgray

If you don't intend to aim for a profession that requires a degree (doctor, lawyer, engineer etc.) is it actually necessary to get a degree? Can you get that far without one? (obviously it's possible since Bill Gates and various other tycoons didn't get one but let's talk realistically)

Well, you can techincally become a "lawyer" without a degree. Engineer to a lesser extent.

But if we are add then we have librarian, heritage manager, curator, archivist, environmental consultant, town planner. civi service fast stream, nurse, psychologist, graduate mental health worker and many more. In a coupe of these a degree isn't necessariy essential, but is becoming more andmore commonplace and will most likey become essentia (nursing). For some, curator for example, postgraduate qualifications are often needed. Sometimes even a PhD.

Given the fact so many people go nowadays, are degrees worth less or on the other hand if you don't have one, you're fairly worthless to employers?

Entirely depends on the employer, really. Providing you can still offer relevant work experience and qualities, alongside a good degree, then you're hardly worthless. Even in careers where a degree isn't necessarily a good degree is rarely, if ever, a disadvantage. Providing the student still makes cosntructive use of their time and takes part in voluntary work, extra curricular activites, gets relevant work experience and contacts and does research and plan career options as soon as possible.

Anyway, I resent the idea that those who don't have a career in mind are just going there to party and hae a good time. Whilst I do appreciate that there are large numbers of people who do that. I realy dislike this idea that university is just becoming a passport to work. It is also an opportunity for academically capable students to explore a subject they are passionate about at a higher level.

Why does it seem like a lot of people do masters degrees (again without a specific career or vocation in mind?)

Do they?

Some do a masters to make up for a "bad" undergrad. A small minority I expect and quite an expensive way of doing things (as those with a 2:2 are in a weaker position from a funding point of view, especially in the arts).

Although many will do one just because they have an interest in the subect and wish to pursue it further. Or they do have their eyes on an academic career. I don't have my eyes set on going into academia but I am thinking about doing an MPhil in History of Medicine. Seems a bit useless doing a research degree if I'm not going into academia. It will hopefully be related to my job, although not essentially or even particularly useful.

Probably won't do it given how long I've been in higher education so far :frown:

I'm doing a Postgrad certificate at the moment. If I'm going to do a masters it will probably be a professionally accredited masters (one with direct professional relevance) as much as I'd like to do the MPhil.....

How smart do you actually have to be to cope with a degree course?

Smarter than Wayne Rooney. Not as smart as Newton or Aristotle.

Don't mean to be frivolous. But it's not a question you can really answer. Most degrees are still fairly demanding. What I have found during my degree is, yes, you need to be academically able.

But work eth , determination and organisational skills are probaby more important than "intelligence" or smartness (whatever they are - feel free to use your definition).

Although my rambling TSR posts can suggest otherwise. I am a fairly good writer. To be able to take in large amounts of information and write critically is something that has always come easily to me. But I don't feel particularly intelligent or smart.

Reply 49

halfoflessthan50p

12

Original post by Gwasgray

His column echoes what Will Self said in the first episode of Grumpy Old Men, that nowadays young people are too concerning with getting a career and paying off their student loans and that he thought university should be a time for staying up til 2am discussing the meaning of life. I'm not [convinced] that's really the best argument for going to uni.

I appreciate your right to your own opinion but I don't agree personally - I think IT IS the best argument for going to university :dontknow:

Not everybody places earning a high salary and getting a job that impresses their friends/family as their main goal in life.

Original post by MagicNMedicine

I can see an argument for someone furthering themselves through education and spending three years doing a course that they enjoy, but some students give the impression that they have gone to uni for the social life and chance to get wasted every night, with the academic work being an occupational annoyance (hence their attendance at lectures is sporadic, they do their work rushed in the last weekend before hand in etc).

You're right there are people like that. But you seem to be exaggerating and sensationalising the problem a bit. 60% of students get a 1st or a 2:1 which suggests the majority of people do in fact settle down and take it seriously by the end.

I'm not knocking socialising at uni, I did a lot of it, but I could never understand the students who went round saying stuff like "nobody works in 1st year, it doesn't count anyway so what's the point" and "you can resit the exam but you can't resit the party", if we had mid term tests which were non-assessed you'd get people who just didn't bother working for them because they had the view that "it doesn't count so why revise?". If you're at uni thinking that the academic side is an occupational annoyance that you have to minimise, then you're getting into debt unnecessarily.

Obviously I do agree with you up to a point but maybe some people think 9% of their earnings over £15K is a reasonable price to pay if it's really 3 of the most enjoyable and formative years of their lives.

I got a 1st from Imperial and I'm doing a job that requires no qualifications at all. You probably think that's the height of stupidity, right?

Reply 50

MagicNMedicine

20

Original post by halfoflessthan50p

You're right there are people like that. But you seem to be exaggerating and sensationalising the problem a bit. 60% of students get a 1st or a 2:1 which suggests the majority of people do in fact settle down and take it seriously by the end.

60% is not a very big majority though. Also from my own experience of the people I knew, whilst there were a couple who worked hard but just found their course difficult and ended up with 2:2s, the majority of the people I knew who ended up with 2:2s were people with decent academic ability who slacked around....or in many cases, who slacked around in year two and then got their act together and got good marks in their final year but resits in year two killed them. I reckon if a university's admissions policy is right, they shouldn't be accepting people who they don't think would be able to get a 2:1 at least.

Original post by halfoflessthan50p

Obviously I do agree with you up to a point but maybe some people think 9% of their earnings over £15K is a reasonable price to pay if it's really 3 of the most enjoyable and formative years of their lives.

I got a 1st from Imperial and I'm doing a job that requires no qualifications at all. You probably think that's the height of stupidity, right?

Well I'm not saying that it should be judged purely as an investment for getting a job, in fact some students who see it that way are wasting their time. You get a lot of economics students for instance, who aren't really that interested in their subject they just want to do what they need to do to get their 2:1 so they can apply for jobs in the financial sector. The tutors will provide extra articles and stuff on the student portal which put the theory you learn into context of topical issues in the modern economy etc, and most of the students won't read them because they don't care, they want to make sure they know the bare minimum that's needed to satisfy the mark scheme to get their 2:1 come exam time then they will leave and go for their graduate job and never think about economics again. This type of approach to education has been started at A level where they are told "its hard to get into university, so you need to get high grades, learn X, Y and Z because that's what the examiners are looking for". That isn't really taking advantage of educational opportunity.

The way I would see it is if you go to university you have the opportunity to learn a lot about a subject, it's the only time in your life when you will have the time to study and the access to people who are highly knowledgeable academics or ex professionals in their field, so this is a chance to master something that you're interested in. So in your case when you got a 1st in Imperial, you've been to an elite department, been educated by top academics and learned a rigorous curriculum which is well worth it, even if you don't ever use it (although I have to say, I think it's a waste when you get all of those top engineers from Imperial who end up working in the City....think of the loss to the UK manufacturing sector!)

So I wouldn't say it was the height of stupidity to get a 1st and then work in something which doesn't need your degree. What would have been the height of stupidity is if you'd gone to Imperial, dossed around, got a 3rd or failed, and claimed that the benefit you got out of uni was 'having a good time'....you can have a good time when you're young without going to uni. The 18-21 year olds who aren't in education, are out getting wasted every weekend, it's not exclusive to unis.

To shag! :d

Original post by alexs2602

Bill Gates went to Harvard, you ****tard!

And how long did he go for? :wink:

Reply 53

Threepigs

14

Original post by Bobifier

And how long did he go for? :wink:

We have established that Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard twice already.

Reply 54

Bobifier

13

Original post by Threepigs

We have established that Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard twice already.

2 is not a good sample size, you could have just got it wrong both times.

Why does the average person go to uni nowadays? Because most well paying jobs nowadays require that magical 2:1 degree, in anything. Because in many parts of the UK it's the only way to get a decent job.

Many will say "to doss around for three years and drink heavily" but I don't think that's the case. I certainly think it's an added bonus of getting that magical piece of paper, but I don't think it's the sole reason. Many people from my school went into apprenticeships for oil & gas firms. They earn a hell of a lot of money - more than most people with degrees will ever get - and thus didn't see the need to go to university. The four years (we're talking about Scotland here) of drinking and lie ins didn't appeal to them as much as high salaries and on the job training, learning only things that are directly required for work.

And let us not forget that you don't have to go to university to have fun. I'm one of the only folks from my high school class to go to university and when I used to return home it certainly wasn't the case that I was the only one who knew how to have fun! If anything it was the opposite because I have a very high workload in my degree and it's common for me to have to work well into the night, whereas they were done at work at 4-5pm, and had enough money to run decent cars, wear decent clothes and not have to drink cheap vodka. Uni has the advantage of being away from home - and I've done things my straight-to-work friends will never do - but it's certainly not a prerequisite to having a good time as a teenager. It hampered mine, although this probably doesn't apply to those doing courses with only 3 contact hours per week...

Reply 56

Gwasgray

OP

Original post by MagicNMedicine

you can have a good time when you're young without going to uni. The 18-21 year olds who aren't in education, are out getting wasted every weekend, it's not exclusive to unis.

True, but I think the difference is uni students don't have to spend their weekdays doing crap jobs that young people often tend to have.

Original post by Smack

Many people from my school went into apprenticeships for oil & gas firms. They earn a hell of a lot of money - more than most people with degrees will ever get - and thus didn't see the need to go to university.

Isn't this because they're doing a lot of overtime? My dad works in an oil refinery and he told me that's how the "operators" earn high salaries.

Original post by Smack

I've done things my straight-to-work friends will never do

Like what?

(edited 13 years ago)

Original post by Gwasgray

Isn't this because they're doing a lot of overtime? My dad works in an oil refinery and he told me that's how the "operators" earn high salaries.

No. They either work offshore (danger money plus long shifts; but they get 2-4 weeks home at a time - which is often longer than their shifts) or as technicians and machinists in manufacturing facilities. They're not as highly paid as the engineer who does the designs and calculations, but they're making excellent money for a 17-22 year old, and will have made at least 80,000 before I'm even earning a penny as a graduate engineer.

Like what?

Just typical student stuff. I've lived in a flat with five other guys my own age, had epic times after nights out in the flat, and just had epic times in the flat with the other guys. You don't get this living at home or in your own flat in a residential area. Best time of my life, sad it had to end.

Reply 58

rlw31

12

Although I'm not entirely certain what I want to do after I graduate, I do know that my job application would be tossed out without a moment's thought if I applied to some of the jobs that I like the look of, without having a degree. I study modern languages, and in the time that I've been at university I could have spent a few years abroad and I'd be fluent in at least two languages by now. But if I want to get a good job, I'd almost certainly need a degree.

Reply 59

Gwasgray

OP

Original post by Smack

Just typical student stuff. I've lived in a flat with five other guys my own age, had epic times after nights out in the flat, and just had epic times in the flat with the other guys.