Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilickbatteries)
    Sociology.

    It has no use. I was duped into thinking university would be a path to a more prosperous life, because that's what we were told all the time at school and at college. Go to university, graduates earn more money and have good jobs.

    That is to a certain extent, true. If you do a degree that has use in the job market, or a degree that leads to a professional qualification, like medicine, law, pharmacy, engineering, architecture, etc.

    People who don't go to university are, IMO, looked upon as failures by some. University is not the be all and end all, nor should it be. It should be a career route for the seriously academically gifted, not for every Tom, **** and Harry who scrapes together 260 UCAS points because even though academics just isn't their thing, they have to go to university.
    Have you considered going to uni and doing an access course for a more vocational degree?
    I agree with part of your statement. But how do you determine who is academically gifted and who is not if you don't give them the opportunity to prove themselves? Although what you've said may apply to a myriad of students, there surely are students who haven't had the opportunity to prove their capabilities in secondary education. Who is to say that they won't develop themselves and reach up to the academic standards of higher ranked universities after undergraduate studies at a lower ranked uni, considering academic aptitude isn't the only factor leading to success?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm hungry.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fas)
    I'm pretty certain the person you quoted was being sarcastic.

    As for the argument in question , i do agree on principle that some Uni's need to be shut down ( let's face it a degree from London Met won't get you a job anywhere that is worthwhile unless you do some seriously big amounts of work experience and/or have people on the inside to get you in )

    However the criteria the OP has suggested is poor for selection and wouldn't work as league tables differ greatly.
    oops..I can't really tell sarcasm from a post at 2am
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMuppet)
    I don't see a lot of employers employing school leavers with good grades (which they could probably do cheaper than employing a graduate - even though the school leaver has the same potential).

    That suggests to me employers see some value to the degree - no matter where the person studied.
    Once upon a time we employed six year olds to scare crows aware from crops. Then we employed 9 year olds to climb chimneys. Then we employed 14 year olds to deliver bread on bikes. Then we employed 16 year olds to pass tools to fetch and carry for skilled trademen. Now we employ 23 year olds to process changes to gas bills over the telephone. That call centre worker may well be a graduate. Her employer doesn't value her knowledge of the romantic poets but that she can have a sensible conversation with a 55 year old and sell him a new gas contract.

    The economy gradually eliminates jobs that younger people have the skills to do. Many more jobs involve social skills that are gained by life and experience than 30 or 50 years ago. 40 years ago there may have been a factory employing 500 people but fewer than 30; the directors, their secretaries, the sales reps, the accounts department, the telephonist and the receptionist ever needed skills to deal with the public.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Agreed.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TobaccoSmoke)
    If only the top 40 best universities remained open that means only the most academically able applicants would ever get a place and the cost to the tax payer would be far less to run the universities.

    Also, with far less universities, the UK might be able to reinstate free tuition.
    Except these places change all the time. Also why 40? Why not 41? What about the top 57? We could try the first 102, right? The cost to the tax payer has already been reduced lol. Hence why funding to teaching was cut 80% and we're charged up to £9000 a year.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josh93)
    [..] You make a very valid point, the only issue that I take with the 'let everyone go to uni as long as they don't expect a graduate career at the end of it' argument is that this experience whilst highly rewarding for the individual in question is also being at least part funded by the taxpayer and it is hard to justify that investment if you aren't producing a graduate with useful skills (which they did not have before and could not have got elsewhere) that are in demand. Educating half a generation into quite significant debt when half of them probably don't need to be also seems ill-advised to me.
    In theory your idea sounds sensible. But in practice it is not. For starters, since teaching grants for non-priority subjects have been cut the taxpayer is not really funding anything any more. They are simply loaning the student the money upfront so they can pay for things in exchange for higher taxation in the long run.

    Secondly, and somewhat ironically, it is only really the STEM subjects which receive any subsidises any more. It is all well and good saying people should only go to university to learn useful skills, but it is the arts and humanities students who are not only paying their own way, but in fact subsidising STEM subjects. Do you honestly think it costs £9,000 per year to teach an English student? If you decide to further reduce support to arts and humanities students, say by limiting to those who meet certain grades, then it paradoxically puts even more pressure on STEM subjects, which often have lower entry requirements already because fewer people are interested in studying them.

    Thirdly, when you take a very utilitarian approach to higher education funding and repayment then you basically end up discriminating people on the basis of their gender and social background. For instance, higher education is made up largely of women. Lots of these women will never repay the full amount of their loans because they have statistically lower wages than men and because they are almost always the primary care givers (e.g. raising children and looking after disabled or elderly relatives), which means extended periods out of the job market. Likewise, a working-class student might find themselves unemployed at the end of their degree simply because they do not have the 'right' contacts which enable them to access certain kinds of work. Of course, most sensible people realise that these are social not educational issues. If the government was really interested in safeguarding their investment they would hire more graduates themselves and find ways to exploit their skills better instead of sending them to the Jobcentre to sign-on like everyone else.

    I have studied both sides. I did computing and mathematics for a year before switching to the arts and humanities. Now I am going back to do medical stuff. While I am not convinced about the sorts of skills people suggest come from studying the arts and humanities, I think equally that the usefulness of STEM subjects is overemphasised. The boundaries are never black and white (e.g. computer games are essentially art yet drive STEM innovation), and lots of STEM research is just as 'frivolous' and unquestioned as arts and humanities research.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatPerson)
    oops..I can't really tell sarcasm from a post at 2am
    haha didn't know that ,i'll let you off
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think closing all the universities ranked lower than 40 would achieve anything, everyone should, if capable, have access to higher education.

    The reason there is such a gap between the "top" and "lower" unis is the funding available to them, which is why I think it would be more effective to combine universities (if it is geographically viable) this would allow uni's to combine loans & grants allowing them to improve both research and teaching quality, resulting in better student experience (more students, lectures, better facilities) and result in more rounded graduates.

    As unis are combining resources there's a better research ethic which could benefit society if new medicines, technologies ect. are found. It's very unlikely that there will be many large scale changes to the university system however.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Have you ever wondered that the majority of employers will have no idea who the top universities are and who the ex-ploys are?

    My brother employs a lot of people and he only thought that 'Oxbridge' was at the top and then after that they were all equal. He says that university really doesn't matter as work experience out ways education on every level
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annuhlees)
    Have you ever wondered that the majority of employers will have no idea who the top universities are and who the ex-ploys are?

    My brother employs a lot of people and he only thought that 'Oxbridge' was at the top and then after that they were all equal. He says that university really doesn't matter as work experience out ways education on every level
    Why is your brother so misinformed as a manager? That is simply poor show on his part.
    From what I have seen, big companies know what unis are good and bad, where as poor ones don't. The thing people don't realise is that big companies offer a career, small ones don't....thus the bottom people get stuck in dead end jobs without realising it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Intriguing Alias)
    I agree with what you say but very much dislike the arrogant way you ended your post.

    Thumbs down -7
    I get pretty annoyed by university snobs on this forum and, in a moment of passion, I lashed out. But it's because I was hurting inside.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SannaS)
    Im sorry but where do you go? Or have you not finished your gcses yet?
    Hahaha good try to put me down.

    Unfortunately I got 11A*s after GCSE, 6 As at AS and am predicted A*A*A*A*. I hold an offer for Economics at the London School of Economics. And other offers.

    Yes?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Behind this thread lurks a serious point - is university right for everyone, eg, have too many people been pushed toward the university/degree route? Are there too many universities? These are valid queries, particularly since some universities are regularly in financial difficulties and some people forecast troubles ahead for the student loans system.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JOR2010)
    Hahaha good try to put me down.

    Unfortunately I got 11A*s after GCSE, 6 As at AS and am predicted A*A*A*A*. I hold an offer for Economics at the London School of Economics. And other offers.

    Yes?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    you might wanna offer SannaS some cold milk or whatever , you know, to soothe that BURN
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Thing is a univesity might be overall low down but in a few subjects could easily be top of their field. Are you seriously suggesting these should be shut down?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jimbo1234)
    Why is your brother so misinformed as a manager? That is simply poor show on his part.
    From what I have seen, big companies know what unis are good and bad, where as poor ones don't. The thing people don't realise is that big companies offer a career, small ones don't....thus the bottom people get stuck in dead end jobs without realising it.
    Baring in mind the company (The owner is the only person above him) earns millions a year i'm sure he isn't a 'misinformed manager'. When he hires an architect he'll look at their drawings, what they've worked on before etc. He went to Nottingham Trent so why would he be bothered about university rankings? For his course, quantity surveyor, Nottingham Trent was the best university at the time (this was a good 13-years-ago).

    Maybe he's done so well as he can get on with the builders, he chills with the chippies in Cuba, he eats lunch with some of the most influential leaders of the world (trust me, he's dined with royalty of other countries). He's well respected he doesn't see anyone above, or below him.

    He's worked his way up from being 'the boy in the office' taking down fish and chip orders, to getting a level two foundation btec thingy to a degree, to charter-ship to finance manager to a big badass salary. He's also been offered the company after the owner retires but he wants to retire to become a paramedic.

    Basically, i've gone on a ramble but he got 2 GCSE's at C grade in Art and DT. He works hard and has done well. He's probably done better than the people who went to oxbridge.

    This is one of the reasons that i'm not bothered that i'm going to an ex-ploy. I'll be able to find work because I've got the personality to get on with anybody, able to go into a room and make a friend, I'm logical and when I want to be I can be academic.

    So yeah, grades aren't everything
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TobaccoSmoke)
    League tables. They're usually very accurate and respected by top employers.
    Well can you post a link please?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Currently at a University that ranks 49th in the 2013 'The Complete University Guide' table.

    Had offers from Warwick, Bristol, UCL yet chose to go to a University in my hometown. Personal preference, and I'm really happy here. Would I be robbed of this opportunity simply because you are so narrow minded that you think all people who go to lower ranked universities do so because they are thick?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JOR2010)
    Hahaha good try to put me down.

    Unfortunately I got 11A*s after GCSE, 6 As at AS and am predicted A*A*A*A*. I hold an offer for Economics at the London School of Economics. And other offers.

    Yes?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Predicted.. Haven't got them yet
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.