This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

How to stop people doing pointless degrees

The original poster is a natural science student who most likely will end working as a laboratory technician...or working in Boots...

Reply 101

frankieboy

13

Original post by AsandaLFC

Of course it is. U ****.

Posted from TSR Mobile

It's about far more than simply learning the language, you dumb cretin.

Reply 102

username1410667

10

Original post by yt7777

How are: Psychology, Economics, English and Geography pointless?

You include these and leave out some actual pointless degrees like: Fashion, American Studies, Golf management etc.

To be honest I was agreeing with you up until you addedyour own 'pointless degree' list. Golf is generally a rich man’s game so if youmanage to get a job in that industry then there's a high chance of a very goodincome.

I've never heard of American studies myself but if someone wants to live inAmerica, teach a certain history subject to do with them, go over as some sortof go between for companies in America and another country it could be usefulto have. Again I know nothing of this subject so just guessing.

And lastly Fashion is not pointless. A lot of people view fashion or go into asubject to do with it expecting it to be easy, pointless and stupidlygirly...well it's not.

In order to properly get into the fashion industry, you need to have greatqualifications. After all how else do you think people get such high payingjobs in the fashion industry? My mother use to work for a big fashion companyback In the 80's which stocked all the high street stuff (It was calledhoneysuckle fashion or something), Anyway she was there as a secretary and apparentlyno girl ever got to work there as a designer unless they had several degree'sin fashion, or they came from the London college of fashion. (Also fashioncovers some many different industries I’m not even going to bother going intoit because I think I’ve gone on too much by this point lol)

Reply 103

inthechaos

8

I don't get how people don't understand that university isn't entirely just to get into a certain career and that maybe people picked these "pointless" degrees because they really enjoy the subject.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 104

Soldieroffortune

2

Only very totalitarian telling people what to study because you dont like it.

Reply 105

Soldieroffortune

2

Original post by risteard

The original poster is a natural science student who most likely will end working as a laboratory technician...or working in Boots...

Given what the OP has said in other places it's doubtful they'd ever be able achieve even the lofty heights of working in boots :L

Reply 106

Chicken.M.

20

Original post by watchingyouwatch

So because you are a cultural philistine you want to make the rest of the world that way?

The world would be a very sad place if there was no appreciation of anything beyond STEM-

"There's more to life than books you know- but not much" !

Stem isn't book related though.

Reply 107

Walt_14

14

Original post by BioStudentx

I know a lot of people like to take art, psychology, sociology, geography, history, English, economics at Unis like Manchester met. So my idea is that we should lower the amount we pay for uni but everyone has to pay - no matter how much their salary is after they have left uni. This could discourage people to do the pointless degrees above.

How it's any of your business what other people would like to study is beyond me, but how the hell do you deem psychology and economics (esp. the latter) as pointless? A 1st in Mathematical Economics and Statistics from the University of Warwick, or a 1st in Economics and History from Oxford? Neither of them look like doss degrees to me and I'm not sure either university offers mickey-mouse courses either so...

Reply 108

xDave-

19

Back in the day, I assume a degree was about perusing an interest rather than getting a job. Nothing wrong with someone wanting to study any of the degrees you've listed at their leisure, and for free too.

The problem is that, now, taxpayers are paying 27k (excluding the maintenance loan) for people to do these degrees and then not get a job out of them. You're tanking 30k+ on everyone that goes. No idea why they keep putting the fees up when this is all that's happening. There must be something that goes on in the background for that to make sense, because it makes none to me. I only pay off something like £80 a year on my loan whilst the interest puts it up by £300ish a year. I'll never pay off mine and will probably only do 3-4 grand of it in total.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 109

Yanyul

1

Original post by BioStudentx

English is pointless. Take the Shakespeare bull**** out of the curriculum and just teach students how to argue, persuade and write. We don't need to analyse how red curtains foreshadow the death of his mum or some BS like that. And yes we would have lawyers, because students are graduating from Oxbridge every year. And yes, doing a STEM subject at Oxbridge does make you superior to doing a English degree at Manchester.

I don't agree with you on this point.
English is not pointless.
English is a language and a way for us to have deep understandings of the English culture and history.
If you say English is pointless, then who is going to teach the future generation English and how will they communicate?

Also, I really dislike the fact you describe Psychology and Sociology as pointless degrees (Controlling my anger.)
Okay, it is your personal view point and I can't change the way you think. But I also would like to tell you that psychology, sociology and the subjects you mentioned ARE NOT pointless! They are there for a reason.

Reply 110

whorace

2

Easy. Roll back the electoral franchise to the landed gentry who have property investments (fixed assets mean they have an interest in the well being of the country). They won't fund pointless universities with taxpayers money for votes.

The liberals say man is self-interested, so the gentry is the best choice since they naturally vote in the interests of the country since it is the only way to ensure that their property is protected.

No socialists since they don't want land reform.
No totalitarian since they steal property.
No selfish capitalists since they trade in non landed assets.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 111

kingdoo

15

Funny thing I would not define any of the degrees listed as pointless.

art, psychology, sociology, geography, history, English, economics are all really worthwhile degrees.

Reply 112

ChaoticButterfly

20

Original post by KingStannis

i've seen physics students look down on biology.

That's cos they are knobs.

Reply 113

ChaoticButterfly

20

Original post by xDave-

Back in the day, I assume a degree was about perusing an interest rather than getting a job. Nothing wrong with someone wanting to study any of the degrees you've listed at their leisure, and for free too.

The problem is that, now, taxpayers are paying 27k (excluding the maintenance loan) for people to do these degrees and then not get a job out of them. You're tanking 30k+ on everyone that goes. No idea why they keep putting the fees up when this is all that's happening. There must be something that goes on in the background for that to make sense, because it makes none to me. I only pay off something like £80 a year on my loan whilst the interest puts it up by £300ish a year. I'll never pay off mine and will probably only do 3-4 grand of it in total.

back in the day the money came from the money trees.

Reply 114

whorace

2

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

That's cos they are knobs.

I know right. No one gives a damn about biology.

Original post by kingdoo

Funny thing I would not define any of the degrees listed as pointless.

art, psychology, sociology, geography, history, English, economics are all really worthwhile degrees.

I'd cross out psychology, sociology and maybe economics. The rest are fairly practical and have something that can actually be taught.

Reply 115

PQ

Clearing and Applications Advisor

21

Original post by hellodave5

Ah gotcha. I have always found the STEM definition as really arbitrary... as it leaves out many sciences.

They include a lot of subjects that people on TSR would likely object to :smile:

For example a recent government grant to universities for teaching buildings/facilities for STEM subjects included:

Agriculture, Anatomy and physiology, Biological Science (not Psychology though), Sport Science, Forensics and Archaeology, Chemistry, Comp Sci, Ocean Science, Earth Science, Environmental Science, Engineering & Technology, Mathematics and Statistics (which will include a lot of students studying specialist quant social science :wink:

), Pharmacy & Pharmacology and Physics.

Psychology would generally be included but for teaching faciltiies there isn't the demand/evidence for specialist labs.

Previously universities used to get this teaching capital funding for all subjects - it's only this year that the budget got cut and funding got narrowed to just STEM subjects.

The government have other categories too...eg additional funding for "high cost" subjects (Chemistry, Physics, Chemical engineering, Mineral, metallurgy and materials engineering). http://www.hefce.ac.uk/kess/stem/

Then of course there is support for "strategically important and vulnerable subjects" Modern languages, quantitative social sciences and maths....(5 years ago they included design (as in graphic design), geography, economics, finance and accounting in this list under something identified as "New Industry, New Jobs" subjects). http://www.hefce.ac.uk/kess/subjects/

Reply 116

KingStannis

3

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

That's cos they are knobs.

No offence but 99% of physicists are complete dicks when it comes to other subjects. Just look at Krauss and Hawkings embarrassing themselves when they try to take on philosophy, and philosophers are forced to school them on basic logic. It's like some tradition from Feynman or something.

Reply 117

ChaoticButterfly

20

Original post by KingStannis

No offence but 99% of physicists are complete dicks when it comes to other subjects. Just look at Krauss and Hawkings embarrassing themselves when they try to take on philosophy, and philosophers are forced to school them on basic logic. It's like some tradition from Feynman or something.