[Muscovite]

(Original post by Aeschylus)
Do you genuinely think your degree at UCL is devalued by other people doing it at Sheffield Hallam (to use your example)

no it isn't. It's devalued by a larger number of graduates each year. A simple mathematical rule that states that the more abundant a resource (in this case a degree) becomes; the less scarce and valuable it is. This means that it probably would be responsible to reduce the number of universities - and what would be more wise: closing redbricks or closing former polytechnic universities? We wouldn't need to even close them; just return them to polytechnic and make them more vocational. there is a huge snobbery about vocational degrees and a lack of vocational skills in the labour market and this would clearly stop that.

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by Aeschylus)
1) Fair point. I agree that there are a lot of people doing humanities than there were 20 years ago. However, many do not do it with an aim for historical research, but as proof (via a degree) that they are intelligent and can write well - I know a lot of History grads who get TCs or decent grad jobs. Of the percentage that stay in academia, dunno, I'm sure there are stats somewhere. The fact remains though that were you to cut places all it would do is boost the unemployment rankings. If you were to cut places you need to have alternates available and I'm not talking just apprenticeships - I'm talking clearly defined courses or job pathways that are more enticing than university

Who cares about statistics though?
All you should want is what is best for the nation, not what some prick in Parl. wants to help him trick people to win elections.
The sad truth is that many of these grads would be better off unemployed at 18 rather than mounting up debt and wasting so many years. But yes, the govt. does need a solution to this rather than what is currently available.

2) The two aren mutually exclusive. The sort of people doing history and medieval studies, generally ,will not be the ones wanting to solve cancer or provide complex economic theories. Reducing the amount of one degree will not mean an increase in the latter and vice versa.

Very true, which is why the education system needs to be utterly revamped to make sure that there are more people in the sciences over the arts.

[hollywoodbudgie]

Ah TSR snobbery...

(Original post by foodnom)
why do universities waste their funding on subjects such as media or film which hold very few job prospects?

That awkward moment when the OP doesn't seem to understand that virtually all university degrees have few job prospects.

[Aeschylus]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)




Very true, which is why the education system needs to be utterly revamped to make sure that there are more people in the sciences over the arts.

Did you know that the UK has one of the highest proportion of home students studying STEM subjects in the world? I'll try digging out the statistics even if you don't care about them

[SnoochToTheBooch]

they might not have great employment prospects but we can't just have certain subjects dying out. If people stop studying them that's what will happen, and then all those people who've devoted their lives to furthering the subject will have done so for nothing. It would delay humanity's progress.

[Aeschylus]

(Original post by Muscovite)
no it isn't. It's devalued by a larger number of graduates each year. A simple mathematical rule that states that the more abundant a resource (in this case a degree) becomes; the less scarce and valuable it is. This means that it probably would be responsible to reduce the number of universities - and what would be more wise: closing redbricks or closing former polytechnic universities? We wouldn't need to even close them; just return them to polytechnic and make them more vocational. there is a huge snobbery about vocational degrees and a lack of vocational skills in the labour market and this would clearly stop that.

Well not particuarly

A degree is just a piece of paper indicating some degree of intelligence
Most people I know whohave graduate jobs have something else than this degree of intelligence to their bow. A degree has never been a cast-iron certainty of a job, despite what the revisionists will say - graduates suffered in the recession in the early 90s.

Ex-polys have for years been doing 'non-vocational' studies even when they were polytechnics so this mythical idea that academic subjects were 'only' at redbrick unis is just that, a myth.

I agree with you about vocational snobbery, however you seem to demonstrate that same snobbery to students of 'ex-polys'. A mate's boyfriend has just graduated from Sheffield Hallam and walked straight into a job. I have an ex at Heriot-Watt (which was techinically never an 'ex-poly' but a techinical college if we're being pedantic) who's done the same. Ditto with Queen Margaret's, York St. John and Swansea Met. So I think it's just because you want degree holders to be part of this 'elite club' to clear the game for yourself and make it easier to get a job. It's never going to be like that. If you think prospects for graduate are bad, you should see what trying to get a decent job is like if you're not at university.

EDIT: Just to clarify only the Heriot-Watt person was an ex. I do not have disgruntled ex-girlfriends getting graduate jobs all over the country, though that would be a great story in itself

[Muscovite]

(Original post by Aeschylus)
Well not particuarly

A degree is just a piece of paper indicating some degree of intelligence
Most people I know whohave graduate jobs have something else than this degree of intelligence to their bow. A degree has never been a cast-iron certainty of a job, despite what the revisionists will say - graduates suffered in the recession in the early 90s.

Ex-polys have for years been doing 'non-vocational' studies even when they were polytechnics so this mythical idea that academic subjects were 'only' at redbrick unis is just that, a myth.

I agree with you about vocational snobbery, however you seem to demonstrate that same snobbery to students of 'ex-polys'. A mate's boyfriend has just graduated from Sheffield Hallam and walked straight into a job. I have an ex at Heriot-Watt (which was techinically never an 'ex-poly' but a techinical college if we're being pedantic) who's done the same. Ditto with Queen Margaret's, York St. John and Swansea Met. So I think it's just because you want degree holders to be part of this 'elite club' to clear the game for yourself and make it easier to get a job. It's never going to be like that. If you think prospects for graduate are bad, you should see what trying to get a decent job is like if you're not at university.

I actually agree with you. Degrees should be an intellectual challenge and award. they should be about mental development. I'm not even expecting a job from my degree. As for the last point - I'm not saying there's anything wrong with snobbery on its own. But in the case of vocational subjects the snobbery about electrician courses and IT courses is strangling the labour market and is bad for the macroeconomy as a whole. And of course I want degree holders to be part of an elite 'club'! hardworking people do not get a degree to be lumped in the same boat as slackers who scraped into bath met or whatever it's called :P

[Aeschylus]

(Original post by Muscovite)
I actually agree with you. Degrees should be an intellectual challenge and award. they should be about mental development. I'm not even expecting a job from my degree. As for the last point - I'm not saying there's anything wrong with snobbery on its own. But in the case of vocational subjects the snobbery about electrician courses and IT courses is strangling the labour market and is bad for the macroeconomy as a whole. And of course I want degree holders to be part of an elite 'club'! hardworking people do not get a degree to be lumped in the same boat as slackers who scraped into bath met or whatever it's called :P

I have a mate doing a welding apprenticeship up in Dreghorn. Apparently people are fighting to get on these things. I don't think there's any sort of snobbery.

I think slagging off degrees without prior or indepth knowledge of the institution or course is silly

For example - three dimensional design at the University of Hertfordshire. Sounds like something people would scoff at over their morning cornflakes right?

However, people on that course helped designed the sets for the films Captain America and X Men: First Class - I've seen the pictures on Facebook.

What I found when I went to university is that a basic degree (3 years, several examinations, lots of coursework and probably a dissertation on top) by itself is nothing. It all depends on the person studying it. I constantly see similar sorts of people doing well, regardless of their degree course, institution etc. So I'm very wary about being snobbish on where people are going and doing - I think it's a silly thing to have.

[Astronomical]

(Original post by Courtney05)
You must be the most arrogant person I have ever spoken to. I am not suggesting you accept my 'intrinscically infallible opinion' or whatever rubbish you came up with through use of a thesaurus. I am simply stating the fact that I came on here to post my own opnion and add my opnion to the question. Therefore I do not expect to be basically bullied into exploring the greater depths of why my opnion is so apparently 'wrong' by somebody with nothing better to do than try and pick apart everything that somebody says that does not fit with their own ideals.

You do realise that this is a forum for discussion, right? If you aren't prepared to discuss your opinion and why it is right, then you I'm sorry to be the one to tell you, but you're in the wrong place.

Back on topic, and I agree with a few of the points made in previous posts, particularly about devaluing degrees. The fact is that whilst most jobs require degrees, this is because of the fact that going to university has (in my opinion wrongly) become the 'norm'. I maintain that if university were as it ought to be (that is, for the academically gifted among us, regardless of background), then the problem of needing a degree to get a job would not exist. Furthermore, I also believe that if the balance was shifted somewhat in reverse, so university became less 'of the norm' once again, this problem would diminish accordingly.

My dad did not have a degree when he started working, and comes from a financially poor family, but he has had a very successful career nonetheless. To get the chances he had, today, he tells me, would be nigh on impossible because of the fact that every man and their dog can get a degree from somewhere, and this didn't use to be the case; degrees used to be rare.

[SpicyStrawberry]

(Original post by FinalMH)
Is this even intelligent rational response?

Everyone is entitled to do what they want with there money fine. So if you can pay the up front fees fine. However over the pass decade the term 'degree' is being destroyed by so called non-acdemic subjects. In my opinion only academic subjects should be considered 'degrees' anything else should have another name such as HND.

What difference is it to me? A huge amount of people have this belief that once they gradate university they will be employed because they have a 'degree' regardless of discipline.( which isn't the case any more) Universities aren't a factory for employing people it is place of academia( I should say the main focus 'was' academia ).

I don't think the subject should be abolished but just rather a name change.

Well if they are unemployable because they did choose a 'weak' degree, it won't make a difference to people who complete degrees in 'academic' subjects, so these people should surely not be afraid of the competition? I don't see how people choosing so-called 'weak' non-academic subjects makes a difference to people who choose to go down a completely different path.

There are no upfront fees for uni by the way apart from the expenses before your first loan installment gets paid

I do however agree that some subjects would be better off as vocational rather than academic qualifications, but defining these will be a challenge because I'm sure tutors in most subjects will put forward their arguments.

[Courtney05]

(Original post by Astronomical)
You do realise that this is a forum for discussion, right? If you aren't prepared to discuss your opinion and why it is right, then you I'm sorry to be the one to tell you, but you're in the wrong place.

Back on topic, and I agree with a few of the points made in previous posts, particularly about devaluing degrees. The fact is that whilst most jobs require degrees, this is because of the fact that going to university has (in my opinion wrongly) become the 'norm'. I maintain that if university were as it ought to be (that is, for the academically gifted among us, regardless of background), then the problem of needing a degree to get a job would not exist. Furthermore, I also believe that if the balance was shifted somewhat in reverse, so university became less 'of the norm' once again, this problem would diminish accordingly.

My dad did not have a degree when he started working, and comes from a financially poor family, but he has had a very successful career nonetheless. To get the chances he had, today, he tells me, would be nigh on impossible because of the fact that every man and their dog can get a degree from somewhere, and this didn't use to be the case; degrees used to be rare.

Completely understand the whole idea about a discussion - but when I am being made to feel uncomfortable in private messages that you are not involved with I think its more than a discussion.

[FinalMH]

(Original post by SpicyStrawberry)
Well if they are unemployable because they did choose a 'weak' degree, it won't make a difference to people who complete degrees in 'academic' subjects, so these people should surely not be afraid of the competition? I don't see how people choosing so-called 'weak' non-academic subjects makes a difference to people who choose to go down a completely different path.

There are no upfront fees for uni by the way apart from the expenses before your first loan installment gets paid

I do however agree that some subjects would be better off as vocational rather than academic qualifications, but defining these will be a challenge because I'm sure tutors in most subjects will put forward their arguments.

Universities shouldn't be employment factories! This concept of weak or hard degrees means nothing when subject isn't considered academic. There are loads of holes in our education, most students grow up nowadays believing there are two types of people, academic and non-academic. So instead of trying to reach there goal in life they will settle for something easier(Lots of research has shown this).

My argument isn't about this different path but just the stance a 'degree' is suppose to have by having non-academic degrees it undermines degrees as a whole.

I understand how the cost of university works so don't patronize me. My point was people who have the money can do what they want.

[ultimate mashup]

(Original post by Muscovite)
no it isn't. It's devalued by a larger number of graduates each year. A simple mathematical rule that states that the more abundant a resource (in this case a degree) becomes; the less scarce and valuable it is. This means that it probably would be responsible to reduce the number of universities - and what would be more wise: closing redbricks or closing former polytechnic universities? We wouldn't need to even close them; just return them to polytechnic and make them more vocational. there is a huge snobbery about vocational degrees and a lack of vocational skills in the labour market and this would clearly stop that.

When ex-polys were actually poly's, they used to offer lots of academic degrees in addition to their vocational options. So, if polytechnics had never been given university status in the first place and remained polytechnics, you would have still had roughly the same number of graduates with degrees flooding the market. The real problem here is not the 'upgrading' of polytechnics but new labours 40% policy. When this target was set there was a massive expantion of higher eduaction and all types of universities took advantage including the russell groups. For example the population of Nottingham University (a russell) is now over 30000. In 1992, it was less than half that.

[imy7]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
Sure, but who can happily afford £40k and 3-4 years of their life to further a interest? Not many people

Well, the millions of people who will be going into further education in september this year it seems. Sure, they're borrowing the money but obviously its not a huge worry to them if they're happy to do it anyway. I, for example, am not worried at all. You're being very over dramatic about it, when really, everyone will be in the same position with mountains of debt, and I'm sure most people will afford a mortgage and a pension if they get a job after graduation. If they don't get a job then they don't have to pay it back.

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by imy7)
Well, the millions of people who will be going into further education in september this year it seems. Sure, they're borrowing the money but obviously its not a huge worry to them if they're happy to do it anyway. I, for example, am not worried at all. You're being very over dramatic about it, when really, everyone will be in the same position with mountains of debt, and I'm sure most people will afford a mortgage and a pension if they get a job after graduation. If they don't get a job then they don't have to pay it back.

I have yet to meet an 18 year old who even vaguely understands the implications of their debt and what the job market is like. You say over dramatic, I say you are naive. Just because everyone will have debt does not mean it will make life easier for you, and many people have already managed to cripple themselves with mortgages and loans even without going to uni

[SpicyStrawberry]

(Original post by FinalMH)
Universities shouldn't be employment factories! This concept of weak or hard degrees means nothing when subject isn't considered academic. There are loads of holes in our education, most students grow up nowadays believing there are two types of people, academic and non-academic. So instead of trying to reach there goal in life they will settle for something easier(Lots of research has shown this).

My argument isn't about this different path but just the stance a 'degree' is suppose to have by having non-academic degrees it undermines degrees as a whole.

I understand how the cost of university works so don't patronize me. My point was people who have the money can do what they want.

I wasn't patronising you, but you said "up-front fees" when there aren't any, not me... :/

It's also rather hypocritical of you to say I'm being patronising when your first comment in response to my original post was "is that even an intelligent rational response?" Yeah, might want to look at yourself before criticising.

I'm also pretty sure that university is where you gain knowledge and qualifications to go into a certain career, so arguably they are employment "factories" to use your term. Not all people go to uni to get a job, but many go in with the view to improve their prospects, hence why most universities have an employability service and activities to do alongside your degree to pad out your CV. Uni isn't a holiday camp.

[FinalMH]

(Original post by SpicyStrawberry)
I wasn't patronising you, but you said "up-front fees" when there aren't any, not me... :/

It's also rather hypocritical of you to say I'm being patronising when your first comment in response to my original post was "is that even an intelligent rational response?" Yeah, might want to look at yourself before criticising.

I'm also pretty sure that university is where you gain knowledge and qualifications to go into a certain career, so arguably they are employment "factories" to use your term. Not all people go to uni to get a job, but many go in with the view to improve their prospects, hence why most universities have an employability service and activities to do alongside your degree to pad out your CV. Uni isn't a holiday camp.

haha sorry. I must of misread your post. That said I truly think you're missing my point. Have you never heard the phase "Do good at school, Go to College, And you will get good job"? The majority of people who go to uni go to get better job. I'm surprised you would disagree with that tbh.

[SpicyStrawberry]

(Original post by FinalMH)
haha sorry. I must of misread your post. That said I truly think you're missing my point. Have you never heard the phase "Do good at school, Go to College, And you will get good job"? The majority of people who go to uni go to get better job. I'm surprised you would disagree with that tbh.

I just said that's exactly what people go to uni for... to get a better job. I thought you were saying university is not at all to enhance your employability which I completely disagree with.

[FinalMH]

(Original post by SpicyStrawberry)
I just said that's exactly what people go to uni for... to get a better job. I thought you were saying university is not at all to enhance your employability which I completely disagree with.

What do you mean by 'enhance your employability'? What sense?

[imy7]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
I have yet to meet an 18 year old who even vaguely understands the implications of their debt and what the job market is like. You say over dramatic, I say you are naive. Just because everyone will have debt does not mean it will make life easier for you, and many people have already managed to cripple themselves with mortgages and loans even without going to uni

I just think that its more important to get a degree which will make my chances of getting a good job much higher, than not get a degree and sit around trying to get into the job I want, and failing, because other people do have the degrees the employers want. Does that not make sense?