The country may have good research facilities, but they will be overtaken in the next few years by Asia, and will be outperformed by American research departments as well as other institutions with more speciallised research institutions.
That doesn't mean that the research won't any good. What point are you trying to make when stating this anyway?My dad is an engineering grad with an Msc in mechanical engineering; he worked as a research student before quitting and starting a business that had nothing to do with engineering. He went into the field because of the same sentiments you are proposing- a guaranteed job.
Msc is more to do with research in technologies as opposed to an Meng which is ACTUAL engineering. Anyway, just because your dad did this it doesn't mean that most engineers do . Engineers earn a very decent wage, sure SOME decide to go to financing, but the greater majority don't. We lack engineers, because not enough are applying for engineering coursesWhich is why it is diheartening to see people actively proposing that education should be comprimised so that essentially trained workers can be cultivated to produce material products without any thought of what benefit education actually brings.
I'm not denying education is good. Knowledge is power, always. But those who want to go to uni for the sake of it and then choose arts and humanities, because they can't think of doing anything else and then end up thinking that theres a wonderful and generous job waiting for them at the end of it are just burning tax payers money, because what they provide isn't worth the money the government payed for them. Especially when you think of how many people there are who flunk their way to scrape 2.1 and gain next to nothing out of it. These are the people i'm having a go at. And a massive majority of them go into humanities and arts, because they are the easier courses which they dont mind doingAnd the second reality is that many top engineering grads go into fields that have little to do with engineering, or at least speciallised engineering with no real public benefit.
I'd love to know where you got this from. Certainly most top grads i know end up specialising in fields where they eventually earn well over 100,000This is what lacks when people talk about how wonderful STEM is; they don't realise that much of what STEM produces will rarely be accessible for public consumption or utilisation.
Only if you fail to get a 2.1As well as this- the second truth is that academic research in engineering and sciences is poorly paid- which disincentivises innovation compared to other countries.
again, how does this mean that they can't provide expertise to society. They may not be as funded as other sectors, but they certainly make use of itand yes, it is how hard you work- I can attest to that, considering that I did form a successful small business in one year compared to my friends who still work at Tescos. But with the arts and humanities, you have to look beyond the statistics. Arts and humanities dont lead to a direct field- that dosent meant they are useless. Many arts grads go on to do post grad work, which is beneficial in many ways for the public,
not really to the public, but themselves. Someone who is commited enough to do a post-grad will massively benefit, but to himself mainlyparticularly as a lot of that work is accessible to the public. Some go on to do professional courses- I am hoping to do the law conversion after I graduate, which means I also wont be officially 'employed' after I graduate, even if I have a guaranteed job in 2 years. Some go overseas and work in NGOs, and others dont even reply to the surveys sent out that determine these stats.
this is the case for every course and equally the amount of ppl who succeed, the amount who fail don't respond either. Probably more, to increase the value of their degreeessentially, the stats are poor recordings of the actual successes of such universities and institutions. Finally, the arts does teach a great deal about human nature- clacissists were the main field of study for a lot of agents in MI5 and MI6, and the civil service still widely consists of people with arts degrees. Law firms have a number of employees without law degrees in the arts, the second most popular degree being in History- and speaking to a lot of law firm representatives- they do like this. History and its ability to cultivate very abstract, quirky ideas, moulds intelligent people which are necessary for complex jobs. It's not what you learn in your degree, its the skills and the abilities you attain from it- which is just like science. You may never use organic chemistry in your life, but it can teach you how to recognise sequences and patterns.
no doubt about this, but only the commited ones get sth out of it. Many scrape a 2.1, learn nothing transferrable and expect a job with a nice salary. Fortunately more employers than you think see through this. At many places, a degree itself provides a limited advantage in the application process which can be made up for with experience and i know this from first hand experiece