This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- marketing @ uni
- Is UCL the best after Oxbridge?
- Durham university went downhill
- What would be the better option after bad a level results?
- Law Universities UK
- University of Kent or University of East Anglia
- Uni and gap year uncertainty
- Bath, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Manchester or UCL for Architecture
- Unis similar to Glasgow and St andrews
- Sheffield Hallam or Sheffield University
- Are some Universities more difficult than others?
- Which offer should I accept?
- bad predicted grades :(
- Why does KCL not perform very well on national rankings?
- Why are polytechnic universitys seen as bad?
- ucas rank or guardian rank
- AUB vs UAL
- Best UK universities to study law
- I cant find five Pharmacy options but really want to study the course, suggestions?
- Best universities for history?
We should shut down the lower ranked universities and bull courses - debate
Scroll to see replies
Original post by DoctorInTraining
Point is like many problems with the UK at the moment - I don't have the perfect solution but I am willing to try and make a change!
You'll be glad to know that the university sector is ahead of you on that: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/news/detail/2013/degree_classification_GPA
(also that I'm part of one of the advisory groups
)(edit: sorry the
*was* definitely immature 
)(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by PQ
You'll be glad to know that the university sector is ahead of you on that: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/news/detail/2013/degree_classification_GPA
(also that I'm part of one of the advisory groups )
(also that I'm part of one of the advisory groups
)Sweet things! Well done!
I am very much for the proactive attitude! I run internal mock exams for medical school to aid their revision and it was the data from those I presented in conferences. It was running these exams that meant I had to become very familiar with the quality assurance of higher education and also the GMC guidelines.
I am genuinely really passionate about education (not just higher education) and had an interview for a medical education position last week so I can safely say all these issues are still at the forefront of my mind!
I do respect your points but overall I found your responses too personal. I respect you as a fellow TSR user - but I feel some of your comments were quite rude. I just hope that this behaviour is isolated to TSR as I think your ideas are (when clearly formed) very good but fear they won't translate due to the manner in which you argue them.
Original post by DoctorInTraining
Who knows to be honest!
I am only proposing an alternative - funnily enough I haven't sent an entire week ironing out all the issues!
I see your point for the 2.2 at Oxford but that is not the case across all "red brick" universities and have several friends who worked very hard and did not get the elusive 2.1 in departments which only award 40% 2.1 or higher - hence my passion on the 2.1 sticking point.
Maybe we could view it like football leagues....all universities are playing but depending on performance year on year their tier can change pending on assessment standards.
Point is like many problems with the UK at the moment - I don't have the perfect solution but I am willing to try and make a change!
I am only proposing an alternative - funnily enough I haven't sent an entire week ironing out all the issues!
I see your point for the 2.2 at Oxford but that is not the case across all "red brick" universities and have several friends who worked very hard and did not get the elusive 2.1 in departments which only award 40% 2.1 or higher - hence my passion on the 2.1 sticking point.
Maybe we could view it like football leagues....all universities are playing but depending on performance year on year their tier can change pending on assessment standards.
Point is like many problems with the UK at the moment - I don't have the perfect solution but I am willing to try and make a change!
I think the 2.1 thing is an issue, but I personally think the better solution is to have universities run a GPA style system rather than trying to keep going with a system which still encourages such an arbitrary cut off.
Fair enough, though not sure eithe of us will be able to do so, people don't really think much of the opinion of corporate lawyers and doctors on educational issues
Original post by Jjj90
Oh by the way, they teach media at Oxford. It isn't just the 'poorer' universities that teach what I presume you would perceive as useless courses.
Oh by the way, they teach media at Oxford. It isn't just the 'poorer' universities that teach what I presume you would perceive as useless courses.
Actually no they don't... at least not as an undergrad course... and media as a post-grad is actually pretty respectable and quite hard.
Surely shutting down lower ranked universities would cause a slippery slope in the future? It'd only be a matter of time before people decide one of the universities isn't performing as well as the others and is therefore shut down because it is lower ranked. There'd come a time when there's only one university left!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
I did my first undergrad when Polys were still around (and no fees). I saw two big phases of expansion, the first when Polys become Universities, and the next one where there were government targets to increase the proportion of graduates. I have done some teaching at a 'new' University and a small amount of helping tutoring at a RG University. The differences in the standard were very sizeable. I think that the logic is fairly simple, on average if one course asks for two E grades at A level, and another asks for three A grades at A level, then you have a very different set of students. Whilst people can change a lot at age 18, on average you are not going to get a massive change (not in my experience anyway). You will end up with very different courses.
I don't think that the big issue is closing courses down. I also think that any sensible employer will know the difference between Universities. A degree will get you through the door, but won't automatically get you a job. So other than the 2.1 hurdle I don't think that this is really an issue. For me the biggest issue is value for money for students. If I were paying 9K/year for my education I would want to know about the quality, rigour and value for money that I'm getting. I also think that University isn't for everyone, if you're not the academic type then there are many other routes. Some people mature a bit later, so maybe the thing to do is go and work for a bit, then resit those A levels that you didn't do so well in - don't just sign up for the first course that will take you.
To believe that all degrees are the same is very naive - especially that all broad grade bands are the same level of difficulty, quality and rigour.
I don't think that the big issue is closing courses down. I also think that any sensible employer will know the difference between Universities. A degree will get you through the door, but won't automatically get you a job. So other than the 2.1 hurdle I don't think that this is really an issue. For me the biggest issue is value for money for students. If I were paying 9K/year for my education I would want to know about the quality, rigour and value for money that I'm getting. I also think that University isn't for everyone, if you're not the academic type then there are many other routes. Some people mature a bit later, so maybe the thing to do is go and work for a bit, then resit those A levels that you didn't do so well in - don't just sign up for the first course that will take you.
To believe that all degrees are the same is very naive - especially that all broad grade bands are the same level of difficulty, quality and rigour.
Original post by simplylldxo
I'm sick of reading these posts; people should to go to the Uni of their choice not whether it's prestigious or not. It's what's comfortable to them, same with the degree choices; it's their decision with what they apply for as it's their future.
Why does it bother people?
Why does it bother people?
Yup am all for making an informed choice....
Depending on subject different unis will be favoured in job market... Unless you going for ken graduate jobs...
Sorry, it appear to be fact... I've been around people selecting for graduate positions and many will say privately that they prefer particular courses as they're better..
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
My lecturer was having a bit of a rant the other day. He said that due to educational reform the number of students has exploded and as a result our educational experience has degraded. He is no longer able to have as much contact time and can't know and help us on all on an individual status. Also due to the large number of papers that need marking he can't assign more essays which would increase our understanding. He then said that half of the former polytechnics shouldn't be universities, and they'd have community college status in the US (ironically as our university is out ranked by some former polys and isn't that great, despite our departmental reputation).
I'm not one of these people who believes that further education should be restricted to traditional subjects, or 'respectable institutions'. I think that some people would be better of pursuing a different route, but if they have a desire to further educate themselves then I would not discourage it. If we got rid of universities it would lead to further youth unemployment, and the economic effect on towns and cities which rely on these universities to bolster their economy will be disastrous.
I'm not one of these people who believes that further education should be restricted to traditional subjects, or 'respectable institutions'. I think that some people would be better of pursuing a different route, but if they have a desire to further educate themselves then I would not discourage it. If we got rid of universities it would lead to further youth unemployment, and the economic effect on towns and cities which rely on these universities to bolster their economy will be disastrous.
Original post by DoctorInTraining
Well yes....
Assume you know the content of both courses intimately to make this assertion.
PS don't care whether correct or not
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Original post by gustavus
Assume you know the content of both courses intimately to make this assertion.
PS don't care whether correct or not
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
PS don't care whether correct or not
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Then why go to the effort of commenting?
University historically was not all about getting a job. In fact it was about the pursuit of academia and "intellectualism" or knowledge (expanding yours and others). For most that is.
Plus, technical schools were for vocational jobs and skills. If you wanted a jobs you could purse some form of apprenticeship/internship that was for most jobs back then.
Uni degree/Uni = Job/employment is a relatively new concept. Of course graduates historically tend to earn more and rise up the ranks more quickly. For multiple reasons/factors of course!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Plus, technical schools were for vocational jobs and skills. If you wanted a jobs you could purse some form of apprenticeship/internship that was for most jobs back then.
Uni degree/Uni = Job/employment is a relatively new concept. Of course graduates historically tend to earn more and rise up the ranks more quickly. For multiple reasons/factors of course!
Posted from TSR Mobile
I did a maths degree; it was totally irrelevant to my life and many of my friends without degrees are earning more than me and higher up the career ladder.
Original post by c471
What role specifically - given you are apparently 19, just accepted onto a course at Bournemouth, I find it hard to believe you have a particularly stressful job (full time is not the same as a 'proper' career type job).
The fact you would say this tells me you havent had to deal with a stressful job.
What for is the fact that if we do not push able students, those students will not develop enough. Our education system should be just as responsible for developing the future leaders of knowledge as it should be about supporting the less able. The reason they should push the best is because innovation and progress is made by the brightest.
If you want biologists that cure cancer, clean fuels, safer roads, cleaner air, longer life expectancy and much more, you HAVE to push those who are capable of making these discoveries.
Why do you assume it is about a grade? Unless you were getting 100%, there was still an opportunity to further your understanding. You feel that we should stop when people reach a benchmark of performance?
Why is it important what grade they expect? Why is it silly for them to spend time trying to bump up your grade, but stupid when they dont do it somebody else? A C in most GCSE's is not going to go anywhere in that subject for that person. The difference between an A and A* can have material impact on a high performer.
Ah, the creativity myth.
Firstly, you cannot be creative if you do not personally understand the topic. That is being carried by a team.
Secondly, you lambasted the right wing education system when in fact it was your school that caused the issue for you.
Thirdly, I beg to differ. Most medical students I have met got there by sitting in their room smashing the books. To get a job as a lawyer, engineer etc, you need good grades. Its a complete myth that you need to sit around talking to learn properly. How do you think research works? You dont just sit round and discuss and suddenly invent a new concept. It takes individual talent. There is a place for group work, and it shouldnt be omitted, but our education system shouldnt be built around it. Most traditional careers would fire you if you were not individually productive, regardless of your contribution to team dynamics.
When did I say A level? I was talking about GCSE's.
In how long? A year? I've had a job where I was expected to know the locations and configurations of around 100 burried service locations off the top of my head, within a fortnight of starting. There are plenty of jobs which require much more than this, hence why it is not inappropriate.
We are not writing anybody off. We are making an evidence based decision about their abilities. If you get a D in maths, you will almost certainly never make it as a physicist for example.
Who said we should say they are crap? Firstly, they are nearly adult by the time they take GCSE's/ A levels, so are probably well aware they lack ability in certain areas. Why is it a negative to tell them the truth?
I cannot understand why you associate being given a true reflection of your ability amounts to saying 'we have no faith in you'. By your logic, sports couches should spend more time training me to be a pro basketball player, and telling me how great I am, despite the fact I am under 6ft and cant hit the hoop to save my life.
The fact you would say this tells me you havent had to deal with a stressful job.
What for is the fact that if we do not push able students, those students will not develop enough. Our education system should be just as responsible for developing the future leaders of knowledge as it should be about supporting the less able. The reason they should push the best is because innovation and progress is made by the brightest.
If you want biologists that cure cancer, clean fuels, safer roads, cleaner air, longer life expectancy and much more, you HAVE to push those who are capable of making these discoveries.
Why do you assume it is about a grade? Unless you were getting 100%, there was still an opportunity to further your understanding. You feel that we should stop when people reach a benchmark of performance?
Why is it important what grade they expect? Why is it silly for them to spend time trying to bump up your grade, but stupid when they dont do it somebody else? A C in most GCSE's is not going to go anywhere in that subject for that person. The difference between an A and A* can have material impact on a high performer.
Ah, the creativity myth.
Firstly, you cannot be creative if you do not personally understand the topic. That is being carried by a team.
Secondly, you lambasted the right wing education system when in fact it was your school that caused the issue for you.
Thirdly, I beg to differ. Most medical students I have met got there by sitting in their room smashing the books. To get a job as a lawyer, engineer etc, you need good grades. Its a complete myth that you need to sit around talking to learn properly. How do you think research works? You dont just sit round and discuss and suddenly invent a new concept. It takes individual talent. There is a place for group work, and it shouldnt be omitted, but our education system shouldnt be built around it. Most traditional careers would fire you if you were not individually productive, regardless of your contribution to team dynamics.
When did I say A level? I was talking about GCSE's.
In how long? A year? I've had a job where I was expected to know the locations and configurations of around 100 burried service locations off the top of my head, within a fortnight of starting. There are plenty of jobs which require much more than this, hence why it is not inappropriate.
We are not writing anybody off. We are making an evidence based decision about their abilities. If you get a D in maths, you will almost certainly never make it as a physicist for example.
Who said we should say they are crap? Firstly, they are nearly adult by the time they take GCSE's/ A levels, so are probably well aware they lack ability in certain areas. Why is it a negative to tell them the truth?
I cannot understand why you associate being given a true reflection of your ability amounts to saying 'we have no faith in you'. By your logic, sports couches should spend more time training me to be a pro basketball player, and telling me how great I am, despite the fact I am under 6ft and cant hit the hoop to save my life.
They've changed the GCSE so it's closed book now.
Posted from TSR Mobile
UEA or Herriot-Watt...which is better for Accounting and Finance...and which has better teaching...night life...graduate prospects...accommodation....lea rning resources and continuation...give in % please :'3...oh yeah Heriot-Watt is Accountancy not Accounting..is there a difference?
Thanking You In Advance
Thanking You In Advance
Original post by aceySnicks_x
UEA or Herriot-Watt...which is better for Accounting and Finance...and which has better teaching...night life...graduate prospects...accommodation....lea rning resources and continuation...give in % please :'3...oh yeah Heriot-Watt is Accountancy not Accounting..is there a difference?
Thanking You In Advance
Thanking You In Advance
Perhaps it would be better to post in the HW forum or in the university life section? You may get more answers there.
I have friends at HW and they love it-HW is a campus uni just outside edinburgh(with regular quick bus links) so you have both the benefits of a busy city with good nightlife but a relaxed campus atmosphere to study in. Accommodation is of a decent size and price and there are brand new halls that are meant to be lovely. As for prospects/resources I would direct you to the aforementioned areas for a more comprehensive answer.Original post by TonksLupin
Perhaps it would be better to post in the HW forum or in the university life section? You may get more answers there.
I have friends at HW and they love it-HW is a campus uni just outside edinburgh(with regular quick bus links) so you have both the benefits of a busy city with good nightlife but a relaxed campus atmosphere to study in. Accommodation is of a decent size and price and there are brand new halls that are meant to be lovely. As for prospects/resources I would direct you to the aforementioned areas for a more comprehensive answer.
I have friends at HW and they love it-HW is a campus uni just outside edinburgh(with regular quick bus links) so you have both the benefits of a busy city with good nightlife but a relaxed campus atmosphere to study in. Accommodation is of a decent size and price and there are brand new halls that are meant to be lovely. As for prospects/resources I would direct you to the aforementioned areas for a more comprehensive answer.Thank you...I decided to apply for both...changed Keele to UEA..hopefully it's a good choice...and I get offer fingers crossed :'3
Original post by aceySnicks_x
UEA or Herriot-Watt...which is better for Accounting and Finance...and which has better teaching...night life...graduate prospects...accommodation....lea rning resources and continuation...give in % please :'3...oh yeah Heriot-Watt is Accountancy not Accounting..is there a difference?
Thanking You In Advance
Thanking You In Advance
I would say that, for obvious reasons, UEA is better known in England whereas Heriot Watt is better known in Scotland.
Heriot Watt is very well respected in Scotland and is very well targeted by large (and small) employers throughout the country, from finance to oil, so with a degree from Heriot Watt you can certainly go far.
Original post by Flauta
I don't think we should, if someone wants to further their knowledge of a particular area, does it matter whether it'll get them a job or not? A university is for those who want to learn more about a subject, doesn't necessarily have to prepare you for a job in that area.
You hit the nail right on the head.
I know someone who worked at M&S, went to do a Bsc in chemistry and physics, then a masters in chemistry - purely for her passion for science, and she's still doing and enjoying her job at M&S!
Posted from TSR Mobile
It's sad that a university is now seen as a springboard to a job more than a place to expand ones knowledge.
What if someone has an interest for a "pointless course" and simply wants to learn about it apposed to get a job from it?
Posted from TSR Mobile
What if someone has an interest for a "pointless course" and simply wants to learn about it apposed to get a job from it?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by techno-thriller
Only maths,physics,chemistry,biology and medicine and engineering should be taught.
STEM snobbery is one of the worst kinds of snobbery.
Related discussions
- marketing @ uni
- Is UCL the best after Oxbridge?
- Durham university went downhill
- What would be the better option after bad a level results?
- Law Universities UK
- University of Kent or University of East Anglia
- Uni and gap year uncertainty
- Bath, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Manchester or UCL for Architecture
- Unis similar to Glasgow and St andrews
- Sheffield Hallam or Sheffield University
- Are some Universities more difficult than others?
- Which offer should I accept?
- bad predicted grades :(
- Why does KCL not perform very well on national rankings?
- Why are polytechnic universitys seen as bad?
- ucas rank or guardian rank
- AUB vs UAL
- Best UK universities to study law
- I cant find five Pharmacy options but really want to study the course, suggestions?
- Best universities for history?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
