Have degrees become too common?

Scroll to see replies

On the contrary, I've already given you two examples which you slyly ignored. Whether they're modules or degrees, they still prove (in my opinion) that some degrees lack quality. I then give you a link to a list created by student forum users which you dispose of suggesting that people are belittling other subjects to increase their own self worth, sorry, was that an opinion of yours or do you have evidence to prove it? Exactly.

Everything I've said is of course my own opinion, I don't need evidence to back it up. I've simply opened a discussion. But unfortunately you're too stubborn to step down despite being presented with unarguable truths.
I'm very open minded on this matter, but you've offered nothing to sway my opinion.

Your "unarguable" truths don't stack up to any of the evidence.
http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Documents/2015/SupplyAndDemandForHigherLevelSkills.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/432873/BIS-15-304_graduate_labour_market_statistics-January_to_March_2015.pdf

If you're as open minded as you state then you must be just too lazy to do any research to come to the conclusions that you have

Reply 41

Stk1010

Original post by PQ

My opinion has derived from talking to real life people, friends, university students etc. Not some government polls/research which I'd take with a pinch of salt anyway. Take a look at how much rep the opening paragraph got, and how many people responded to the thread about pointless degrees, people obviously feel the same way as I do.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 42

Clearing and Applications Advisor

Original post by Stk1010

Reply 43

macromicro

Original post by Stk1010

I'm open to the idea that more degrees could actually be beneficial to society as a whole and you do make a valid point, but that's no help for new graduates at present who as I've said, find themselves struggling for work or in work that is completely irrelevant to their degree or in entry level jobs. Your theory doesn't come into place for another decade at least (most likely more), so what are people supposed to do until then?

The "theory" is a continual process not something that comes into effect. The graduate labour market is very healthy currently and with average education being higher humans find new and innovative ways to be productive in society, not simply from finding a job. The research sector is larger than ever and will be increasingly important for graduates to enter. Teaching is under-supplied despite being essential. The problem is a matter of perspective. What graduates really mean when they say there are no jobs is "there aren't many jobs starting on £40k where I can retire in 20 years". It has been drilled into their heads that a degree means more money rather than more personal improvement and potential for society. If they understood that we are here to progress humanity not take from it then they would not have such obtuse thoughts on salary, and increasing education will help them achieve that worldview.

Imagine a world where everyone had the education and intelligence of a professor. One day Earth will be that world. The more we encourage intelligence the quicker humanity progresses. Imagine an Einstein coming around every decade instead of every century. Imagine an entire population of Einsteins and Wittgensteins and Arendts and Shakespeares. Can you imagine where that would take the human race - what we could achieve?

It's also worth addressing the quality of degrees that are available. I think the term being thrown around is 'Micky Mouse' degrees. For instance, Staffordshire University allows students to study the life of David Beckham and I remember hearing of a university in America allowing students to study Harry Potter!? Obviously these are at the extreme end of the scale. But my question to you is are these kind of 'irrelevant' and 'worthless' degrees really going to benefit society in the long run?

This is a common myth. They are not degrees but modules. The Harry Potter module was on a literature degree and it examined the cultural significance of the books, which I'm sure you'll agree is certainly not irrelevant or worthless considering the impact they have had on the world - about half a billion Harry Potter books have been sold, the films alone are billion-dollar blockbusters, there are numerous tourist attractions worldwide... Need I go on? It's quite clear why someone would want to study their effect on and significance for society. The same goes for Beckham who was an international icon for millions. The worthiness of a degree or module does not solely come down to its practical application in a job - that is one dimensional thinking and would sooner rob us of our humanity.

Not to mention the value for money! I'd bet my life that if you asked every single student in the UK whether their course was good value for money they'd say absolutely not. Universities frankly don't seem to care about their students, it's just one big money making machine.

Please define value for money?

For me the number one factor is brain development and capacity for open thought. Unfortunately today degrees have become synonymous with jobs which is where this confusion in value has come from. Degrees are not a ticket for a job. If you get a degree and in the process develop your brain and advance beyond your previous capacity for intellectual thought then regardless of the job you end up in, it was good value. You can't put a price on intelligence and in the long run you will be better off for it. People need to let go of the view that degrees are an investment in your career - they are an investment in yourself first and foremost.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 44

TheDefiniteArticle

It's the natural development of an economy - and one which is necessary, given the dramatically increasing influence that AI will have on our lives in the coming years.

Reply 45

Josb

Original post by PQ

Which graduates are these?

The employment data shows there's still a major boost to employability for graduates: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/432873/BIS-15-304_graduate_labour_market_statistics-January_to_March_2015.pdf

I meant graduates that cannot find jobs in accordance with their degrees, eg. holding a PhD in literature and working in retail. This cannot be found in the (un)employment stats, but everybody knows how difficult it is for Humanities graduates to find a good job.

For this reason, I would support a ban on non-funded PhDs.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 46

Josb

Original post by shawtyb

is it true that to do a doctorate, you have to write a book in that subject?

A thesis, not a book. The difference is that nobody reads the former.

Reply 47

shawtyb

Original post by Josb

A thesis, not a book. The difference is that nobody reads the former.

what is a thesis?

Reply 48

username2471155

Original post by Stk1010

Degrees used to be for the rich and well-educated class of society. Anybody who had a degree was highly sought after. If you had a degree you were pretty much set for life. Fast forward to the present and degrees are dished out to pretty much anyone and everyone.
The majority of my year at school went on to university and I think this is the case for most schools nowadays.
There's pretty much a course for anything you can think of and entry requirements are much lower than they used to be, not to mention student finance and government grants; universities are pretty much open to anyone. Don't get me wrong, I believe that everyone has the right to be educated to whatever level they desire. However, I've noticed that degrees just don't offer the security that they used to anymore because they've become so common, meaning it's difficult to stand out. I know from my own experience and from my friends that employers don't just want someone with a degree nowadays, they want someone with real work experience and because graduate jobs are so competitive now most graduates end up in entry level roles with no relevance to their degree anyway, which they could've got without a degree.

It seems to me like the whole system has become a bit of a shambles. I'm interested to see what other people think about this and whether anyone agrees.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Bachelor and Masters are now in my opinion but PhD's are kind of rare

Reply 49

popcornjpg

I personally don't think there's a problem with more people pursuing degrees - I think the problem lies with the fact that many people just want to get degrees because it's what most other people are doing. There is now also a great emphasis on going to university to become employable, whereas I always thought it was more about the experience of becoming educated and doing something you're passionate about. I'm guessing that's why law degrees have become so over-subscribed - people think it's an easy route into a career.

Reply 50

Josb

Original post by shawtyb

what is a thesis?

A valuable addition to the knowledge of a specific topic.

In other words, a pile of paper that nobody reads (apart from the examiners).

It looks like that:

Reply 51

shawtyb

Original post by Josb

A valuable addition to the knowledge of a specific topic.

In other words, a pile of paper that nobody reads (apart from the examiners).

It looks like that:

oh haha

Reply 52

Josb

Original post by macromicro

Take a moment to think about how illogical your claim is.

You think less people should go to university so that there are less human beings who can do the same higher level jobs? In other words, you think it would be better if the average human was less educated and less able to do more complex tasks for society simply so that getting one of these higher level jobs would be easier for others who also want them?

No. I'm saying that the number of students should be determined by economic demand. It is a fallacy to believe that increasing the number of graduates will reduce unemployment.

Tony Blair said "Education, education, education", but he should have said "Jobs, jobs, jobs". Therefore, degrees would have only been used as a way to increase employment and not as a goal per se; they would have been tailored for the economic needs of the country and not for political purpose.

Indeed, universities have not fundamentally evolved since when they were only reserved to the elite. The main structure of a degree remains the same, with lectures and dissertations in abstract, theoretical subjects such as Physics and Philosophy. This expansion - or degree inflation - was principally done thanks to a massive creation of universities, whilst they don't really deserve the name (they were called Polytechnics before). These degrees are useless when looking for a job, unless perhaps from prestigious universities.

Original post by macromicro

You don't see any better solution here? Such as perhaps making use of the increasing education and productivity of humans? No you think we should just dumb ourselves down to make current jobs less competitive?

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 53

Josb

Original post by darkvibes

maybe in your case with a history degree

You're right, Mr. Genius.

Reply 54

username1862217

Original post by shawtyb

is it true that to do a doctorate, you have to write a book in that subject?

A thesis, which is usually 200-400 pages consisting of a few chapters. This is written at the end of a doctorate, not prior to one.

Reply 55

shawtyb

Original post by Keyhofi

A thesis, which is usually 200-400 pages consisting of a few chapters. This is written at the end of a doctorate, not prior to one.

**** that!

Reply 56

username1862217

Original post by shawtyb

**** that!

Haha yeah, I imagine it will be a killer. My Master's disertation was a little shy of 100 pages, and that took me over two months of nothing but planning, writing, and editing every single day to complete.

Reply 57

shawtyb

Original post by Keyhofi

jesus dont say that! i start my dissertations in my 2nd year which is in like 2-3 months!

Reply 58

macromicro

Original post by Josb

No. I'm saying that the number of students should be determined by economic demand. It is a fallacy to believe that increasing the number of graduates will reduce unemployment.

Perhaps you should read through the links PQ posted - you seem to be confused about the statistics.

Regardless, increasing the number of students will increase intelligence and education levels - and there is certainly demand for this. It is a natural and inevitable progression.

Indeed, universities have not fundamentally evolved since when they were only reserved to the elite. The main structure of a degree remains the same, with lectures and dissertations in abstract, theoretical subjects such as Physics and Philosophy. This expansion - or degree inflation - was principally done thanks to a massive creation of universities, whilst they don't really deserve the name (they were called Polytechnics before). These degrees are useless when looking for a job, unless perhaps from prestigious universities.

This is irrelevant to anything I've said.

I don't think that studying "classical" subjects will benefit many students, who don't have the capacity to understand what they are taught - eg. they just memorise. I fully support the use of vocational education on the German/Swiss model, which used to exist in the UK with the Polytechnics, before they were sadly transformed into "universities".

The vast majority of people have the capacity since intelligence is nurtured. Memorising plays very little role at university due to the concentration on critical analysis via coursework, independent research and highly weighted dissertation. University increases national intelligence levels whether you dislike this notion or not. Everything that advances mankind: scientific discovery, philosophical insight, technological breakthrough, etc. revolves around intelligence, knowledge and research. All signs point to education as they have for years.

Reply 59

Josb

Original post by macromicro

Perhaps you should read through the links PQ posted - you seem to be confused about the statistics.

These stats do not mention the university and degree studied.

Original post by macromicro

Regardless, increasing the number of students will increase intelligence and education levels - and there is certainly demand for this. It is a natural and inevitable progression.

Someone won't be more intelligent by studying a degree, especially if it's media studies at an ex-poly.

Original post by macromicro

This is irrelevant to anything I've said.

Of course it's relevant. I pointed the inadequacy of university teaching when looking for a job, whilst you seem to think that a degree automatically gives a good job.

Original post by macromicro

The vast majority of people have the capacity since intelligence is nurtured. Memorising plays very little role at university due to the concentration on critical analysis via coursework, independent research and highly weighted dissertation. University increases national intelligence levels whether you dislike this notion or not. Everything that advances mankind: scientific discovery, philosophical insight, technological breakthrough, etc. revolves around intelligence, knowledge and research. All signs point to education as they have for years.

I never said that universities aren't useful for technological progress, etc. But I fail to see the usefulness of universities that give Mickey Mouse degrees and make very little research. Fifty universities and a hundred of technical schools would be better imo.