Getting Rid of Humanities
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Dukeofwembley
biomedical science is a worthless degree, or worth very little, same goes with biology and to a lesser extent chemistry
eeyyyyyy, say what you want about biology, but dont be pointing any fingers at chemistry
Original post by combbrah
But where would all the hot easy sluts be if it weren't for psychology and sociology degrees?
OP didn't think this through
OP didn't think this through
Where do you go exactly?
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by ilickbatteries
What can you see that I can't?
I can't see a single thing I've learnt on my degree so far that is at all relevant to a job. All I've learnt is a bit more sociology
This is why to me it feels like an extension of A-Levels. I learnt how to essay write at A-Level. My essay technique has barely changed.
I can't see a single thing I've learnt on my degree so far that is at all relevant to a job. All I've learnt is a bit more sociology
This is why to me it feels like an extension of A-Levels. I learnt how to essay write at A-Level. My essay technique has barely changed.
Never did research? A presentation? Group work? Plan? Analysis? Evalaute? How to argue your case properly, has it not taught you to ask intelligant questions? (you're using those two now sort of) Has it not taught you the value of constructive feedback - how to apply it/how to give it? I could go on.
The point is if you feel all these are second nature then that's good - It means you've learnt well. For some, these things are hard to learn, hence why it's good to learn them.
Original post by ilickbatteries
If someone has bad A-Level grades, IMO they have very little right to challenge for a top university place. I am aware of course of exceptions, some universities take poorer grades from students from schools/areas they know are failing, etc.
If you're not going to university with the intent of ending up with a high enough salary to pay your loans back you shouldn't be going to university. You're massively wasting the taxpayers money.
From what I've been told in this thread you've got about as much chance of getting into law David Cameron has of being elected in 2015.
If you're not going to university with the intent of ending up with a high enough salary to pay your loans back you shouldn't be going to university. You're massively wasting the taxpayers money.
From what I've been told in this thread you've got about as much chance of getting into law David Cameron has of being elected in 2015.
no, not a top university place of course. i don't disagree that people with amazing grades should be given the advantage to go somewhere with an amazing reputation, otherwise what is the point of working hard? i just mean to a general university. i am going in with the intent, i may not get in to law but trust me, it is not my aim to earn little enough that i don't pay back my degree! i think most people going to uni don't hope for a small salary, however there are obvious exceptions to this.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ilickbatteries
Now, I'm not personally saying we should do this (turkeys don't vote for Christmas and all that) but what would happen if we, say, massively reduced the amount of university places for degrees like
English Literature
English Language
History
Psychology
Sociology
Politics
Philosophy
Geography
RE
etc
Degrees that are generally essay based and don't prepare you for an exact job.
Seems to me as if we're just sending too many people to university to do these kind of degrees, to go into jobs that are non-subject specific generic graduate jobs.
Now, I know we need English teachers, and RE teachers, and history teachers and geography teachers etc so yeah the subjects have some use, but do we really need as many English Literature graduates as we have? Do we need so many historians, sociologists, philosophers, psychologists, etc?
What do you think? What would be the ramifications of this if we took 60% of the places on these degrees away and put the extra funding into subjects like maths, chemistry, biology, physics, engineering, law, medicine, nursing, biomedical science, other STEM subjects and so on
English Literature
English Language
History
Psychology
Sociology
Politics
Philosophy
Geography
RE
etc
Degrees that are generally essay based and don't prepare you for an exact job.
Seems to me as if we're just sending too many people to university to do these kind of degrees, to go into jobs that are non-subject specific generic graduate jobs.
Now, I know we need English teachers, and RE teachers, and history teachers and geography teachers etc so yeah the subjects have some use, but do we really need as many English Literature graduates as we have? Do we need so many historians, sociologists, philosophers, psychologists, etc?
What do you think? What would be the ramifications of this if we took 60% of the places on these degrees away and put the extra funding into subjects like maths, chemistry, biology, physics, engineering, law, medicine, nursing, biomedical science, other STEM subjects and so on
Are you suggesting maths, physics etc lead to 'specific' jobs?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Sweet-Nothing
eh, why?? I don't think either of them hire many geography students at all?
Well, maybe they don't hire them. They certainly use the research from the field to find out where oil deposits and etc are likely to be.
Original post by Rgman27
Well, maybe they don't hire them. They certainly use the research from the field to find out where oil deposits and etc are likely to be.
I think you mean Geology, not Geography. They are very distinct subjects.
I think the OP raises some challenging questions.
One has to remember that between 1971 and 1987 the proportion of under 21s entering higher education was around 14%. It is now just shy of 40%.
If you go back into the the distant past, you can be met by the statement that Britain was a different world then. However if you look at the period from 1971 to date, you are looking at the participants in the present economy.
The reality is that someone aged 45-65 in a white collar job is unlikely to have a degree and someone aged 25-35 in a white collar job probably has a degree. If you meet a 60 year old solicitor, he probably has no degree. If you meet a 50 year old solicitor, he probably does. If you meet a 50 year old sales manager he will probably not have a degree. A 35 year old sales manager will.
Despite this, there is no obvious stratification by age and graduate status in the economy. No-one would say that 60 year old solicitors are different from 50 year old solicitors or that 50 year old sales managers are different from 35 year old sales managers other than what you would naturally expect purely by age (participation rates in sport, interests in music, age of children etc). Such division in the economy as there is, is by age and gender not age and educational attainment. To the extent that the population of 60 year old solicitors looks different to the population of 50 year old solicitors, it is because there are more women. Whether a white collar job is populated by graduates or non-graduates doesn't change the character of the workforce.
For all the young arts graduates who claim that their degree gave them lots of transferable skills, one can say that their seniors who never acquired degrees do not appear to have fewer of those skills and there is no real evidence that when those seniors were younger, those skills were acquired at a different age. There is no real sign that a 25 year old solicitor in 1984 lacked skills compared to a 25 year old solicitor today. Frankly, most of the non-job specific skills that most young graduates claim to have acquired through their degrees are skills that they would have acquired merely by living in a literate and articulate world.
One has to remember that between 1971 and 1987 the proportion of under 21s entering higher education was around 14%. It is now just shy of 40%.
If you go back into the the distant past, you can be met by the statement that Britain was a different world then. However if you look at the period from 1971 to date, you are looking at the participants in the present economy.
The reality is that someone aged 45-65 in a white collar job is unlikely to have a degree and someone aged 25-35 in a white collar job probably has a degree. If you meet a 60 year old solicitor, he probably has no degree. If you meet a 50 year old solicitor, he probably does. If you meet a 50 year old sales manager he will probably not have a degree. A 35 year old sales manager will.
Despite this, there is no obvious stratification by age and graduate status in the economy. No-one would say that 60 year old solicitors are different from 50 year old solicitors or that 50 year old sales managers are different from 35 year old sales managers other than what you would naturally expect purely by age (participation rates in sport, interests in music, age of children etc). Such division in the economy as there is, is by age and gender not age and educational attainment. To the extent that the population of 60 year old solicitors looks different to the population of 50 year old solicitors, it is because there are more women. Whether a white collar job is populated by graduates or non-graduates doesn't change the character of the workforce.
For all the young arts graduates who claim that their degree gave them lots of transferable skills, one can say that their seniors who never acquired degrees do not appear to have fewer of those skills and there is no real evidence that when those seniors were younger, those skills were acquired at a different age. There is no real sign that a 25 year old solicitor in 1984 lacked skills compared to a 25 year old solicitor today. Frankly, most of the non-job specific skills that most young graduates claim to have acquired through their degrees are skills that they would have acquired merely by living in a literate and articulate world.
Original post by al-pal
They can, I suppose (academia/research), but quite often they don't.
Original post by nulli tertius
I think the OP raises some challenging questions.
One has to remember that between 1971 and 1987 the proportion of under 21s entering higher education was around 14%. It is now just shy of 40%.
If you go back into the the distant past, you can be met by the statement that Britain was a different world then. However if you look at the period from 1971 to date, you are looking at the participants in the present economy.
The reality is that someone aged 45-65 in a white collar job is unlikely to have a degree and someone aged 25-35 in a white collar job probably has a degree. If you meet a 60 year old solicitor, he probably has no degree. If you meet a 50 year old solicitor, he probably does. If you meet a 50 year old sales manager he will probably not have a degree. A 35 year old sales manager will.
Despite this, there is no obvious stratification by age and graduate status in the economy. No-one would say that 60 year old solicitors are different from 50 year old solicitors or that 50 year old sales managers are different from 35 year old sales managers other than what you would naturally expect purely by age (participation rates in sport, interests in music, age of children etc). Such division in the economy as there is, is by age and gender not age and educational attainment. To the extent that the population of 60 year old solicitors looks different to the population of 50 year old solicitors, it is because there are more women. Whether a white collar job is populated by graduates or non-graduates doesn't change the character of the workforce.
For all the young arts graduates who claim that their degree gave them lots of transferable skills, one can say that their seniors who never acquired degrees do not appear to have fewer of those skills and there is no real evidence that when those seniors were younger, those skills were acquired at a different age. There is no real sign that a 25 year old solicitor in 1984 lacked skills compared to a 25 year old solicitor today. Frankly, most of the non-job specific skills that most young graduates claim to have acquired through their degrees are skills that they would have acquired merely by living in a literate and articulate world.
One has to remember that between 1971 and 1987 the proportion of under 21s entering higher education was around 14%. It is now just shy of 40%.
If you go back into the the distant past, you can be met by the statement that Britain was a different world then. However if you look at the period from 1971 to date, you are looking at the participants in the present economy.
The reality is that someone aged 45-65 in a white collar job is unlikely to have a degree and someone aged 25-35 in a white collar job probably has a degree. If you meet a 60 year old solicitor, he probably has no degree. If you meet a 50 year old solicitor, he probably does. If you meet a 50 year old sales manager he will probably not have a degree. A 35 year old sales manager will.
Despite this, there is no obvious stratification by age and graduate status in the economy. No-one would say that 60 year old solicitors are different from 50 year old solicitors or that 50 year old sales managers are different from 35 year old sales managers other than what you would naturally expect purely by age (participation rates in sport, interests in music, age of children etc). Such division in the economy as there is, is by age and gender not age and educational attainment. To the extent that the population of 60 year old solicitors looks different to the population of 50 year old solicitors, it is because there are more women. Whether a white collar job is populated by graduates or non-graduates doesn't change the character of the workforce.
For all the young arts graduates who claim that their degree gave them lots of transferable skills, one can say that their seniors who never acquired degrees do not appear to have fewer of those skills and there is no real evidence that when those seniors were younger, those skills were acquired at a different age. There is no real sign that a 25 year old solicitor in 1984 lacked skills compared to a 25 year old solicitor today. Frankly, most of the non-job specific skills that most young graduates claim to have acquired through their degrees are skills that they would have acquired merely by living in a literate and articulate world.
Couldn't agree more.
Non-technical degree education seems to replace 3 months of work experience with 3 years of expensive drink-induced haze.
I agree with this. There are a lot more humanities graduates in unemployment than science graduates. I also think it's unfair to let people pay £9000 a year for a degree that won't get them a job
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by TheScientist_
I agree with this. There are a lot more humanities graduates in unemployment than science graduates. I also think it's unfair to let people pay £9000 a year for a degree that won't get them a job
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
So how does this translate to a 27 year old male (me), who has had a series of low paid jobs and is considering starting an Access to Higher Education course in September with the aim of progressing on to a humanities degree (English) in order to try and break out of the cycle of low paid employment?
I happen to have an aptitude and an interest in English, hence the reason I am considering studying it. I am living quite a lonely and isolated life at the moment, having recently moved away from the town that I spent most of my life in, and although there is no guarantee of my social life taking a miraculous 360 simply by virtue of the fact that I am studying at a University, placing myself in that environment will significantly increase the chances of meeting like minded people who I can befriend. But I digress...
I apologise in advance for not having the skills or interests to contribute to all of the scientific, financial, mathematical and mechanical progress that is currently being undertaken in the world, but I have learnt to except that these are areas that I will never excel in, or have a particular interest in.
I don't think some of the people passing comment on the value of a humanities degree really appreciate how discouraging and downright dispiriting their remarks can be to someone that wants to invest the time, energy and commitment to improving their standard of living, employment opportunities and general well-being by choosing to study a course of higher education.
I am not suggesting that a degree is a form of panacea, and that once an individual has obtained one, then everything will slot neatly into place, but for some people, myself included, it is something to aim for, regardless of how far away the target may currently be hovering in the far distance.
There, I've said my piece!
Original post by Entroducing
in order to try and break out of the cycle of low paid employment?
I think it would be preferable if you had an idea of what you were trying to break into.
Then you could decide whether an English degree was the best way of achieving it.
Original post by Guybrush Sheepgood
I think the more 'thickies' who go to university, the better.
Why are they thickies? POOR EDUCATION
FYI a B, or even a C, does not make someone thick.
Why are they thickies? POOR EDUCATION
FYI a B, or even a C, does not make someone thick.
It certainly does.
Original post by Entroducing
So how does this translate to a 27 year old male (me), who has had a series of low paid jobs and is considering starting an Access to Higher Education course in September with the aim of progressing on to a humanities degree (English) in order to try and break out of the cycle of low paid employment?
Why do you think it will do that?
Original post by Observatory
Why do you think it will do that?
Because I will be able to access the graduate job market, apply for postgraduate training schemes and courses of further education, and generally demonstrate to myself and future employers that I have the discipline and drive to complete a course of higher education.
With regards to working out what job sector I would like to break into -
I can't say with certainty that I know what career path I would like to take yet, and this has admittedly been a very worrying issue for me lately.
My confidence has taken an absolute battering recently, and I do sometimes question my ability to work within a graduate level position. But then I have moments when I think 'why shouldn't I?' I just have to play to my strengths, and aim to find a position which suits my personality and skill level.
I am very open to any suggestions of alternative employment routes that I could look into, but I appreciate that this advice can be hard to dispense if you don't know the person you are advising on a personal level.
I think that apprenticeships are brilliant for those that are suited to them, and maybe a few years ago I would have benefitted from doing one, but I think that the opportunities to do one have rapidly diminished now that I am 25+
I have a passion (and an aptitude) for the English Language, Arts and Social and Cultural theory, so would want to potentially work within a related field. I am not the type of person who finds it easy to network and make connections, I am quite shy in this respect. I like interacting with people, but I will wait for them to come to me rather than the other way round.
I would not be eligible for employment in the armed forces, police etc. due to a history of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Anxiety related illness, so I can't go down that route....
I've just realised that I've hijacked the thread.
Apologies!Original post by Entroducing
Because I will be able to access the graduate job market, apply for postgraduate training schemes and courses of further education, and generally demonstrate to myself and future employers that I have the discipline and drive to complete a course of higher education.
With regards to working out what job sector I would like to break into -
I can't say with certainty that I know what career path I would like to take yet, and this has admittedly been a very worrying issue for me lately.
My confidence has taken an absolute battering recently, and I do sometimes question my ability to work within a graduate level position. But then I have moments when I think 'why shouldn't I?' I just have to play to my strengths, and aim to find a position which suits my personality and skill level.
I am very open to any suggestions of alternative employment routes that I could look into, but I appreciate that this advice can be hard to dispense if you don't know the person you are advising on a personal level.
I think that apprenticeships are brilliant for those that are suited to them, and maybe a few years ago I would have benefitted from doing one, but I think that the opportunities to do one have rapidly diminished now that I am 25+
I have a passion (and an aptitude) for the English Language, Arts and Social and Cultural theory, so would want to potentially work within a related field. I am not the type of person who finds it easy to network and make connections, I am quite shy in this respect. I like interacting with people, but I will wait for them to come to me rather than the other way round.
I would not be eligible for employment in the armed forces, police etc. due to a history of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Anxiety related illness, so I can't go down that route....
I've just realised that I've hijacked the thread. Apologies!
With regards to working out what job sector I would like to break into -
I can't say with certainty that I know what career path I would like to take yet, and this has admittedly been a very worrying issue for me lately.
My confidence has taken an absolute battering recently, and I do sometimes question my ability to work within a graduate level position. But then I have moments when I think 'why shouldn't I?' I just have to play to my strengths, and aim to find a position which suits my personality and skill level.
I am very open to any suggestions of alternative employment routes that I could look into, but I appreciate that this advice can be hard to dispense if you don't know the person you are advising on a personal level.
I think that apprenticeships are brilliant for those that are suited to them, and maybe a few years ago I would have benefitted from doing one, but I think that the opportunities to do one have rapidly diminished now that I am 25+
I have a passion (and an aptitude) for the English Language, Arts and Social and Cultural theory, so would want to potentially work within a related field. I am not the type of person who finds it easy to network and make connections, I am quite shy in this respect. I like interacting with people, but I will wait for them to come to me rather than the other way round.
I would not be eligible for employment in the armed forces, police etc. due to a history of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Anxiety related illness, so I can't go down that route....
I've just realised that I've hijacked the thread.
Apologies!I am not wishing to be nasty to you, but I would be critical about this in a 17 year old. In a 27 year old, it is indefensible. Spend time putting together a career plan (or a couple bearing in mind the first one may not work out) and then implement it.
Well that offended a lot of humanities students :/
No offence taken. I agree that it is a problematic position to be in, I have spent a lot of time drifting aimlessly.
Whatever career plan I assemble, I think that a degree will be be a core component. I cannot however, choose a degree that I do not have a passion for, as I will not be able to see it through to completion.
I have already demonstrated this to myself by attempting an Open University degree in business, which I subsequently failed to complete due to a complete lack of interest in the subject (it seemed like a 'safe' option at the time).
A back up plan, like you say, will also need be taken into account.
Edit I should mention that I have reservations about working entirely in an office based environment, which an English degree sort of lends itself to...as you can tell, I am little bit confused at this stage of my life.
Whatever career plan I assemble, I think that a degree will be be a core component. I cannot however, choose a degree that I do not have a passion for, as I will not be able to see it through to completion.
I have already demonstrated this to myself by attempting an Open University degree in business, which I subsequently failed to complete due to a complete lack of interest in the subject (it seemed like a 'safe' option at the time).
A back up plan, like you say, will also need be taken into account.
Edit I should mention that I have reservations about working entirely in an office based environment, which an English degree sort of lends itself to...as you can tell, I am little bit confused at this stage of my life.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Dukeofwembley
biomedical science is a worthless degree, or worth very little, same goes with biology and to a lesser extent chemistry
Although off-topic, you do realise all of modern medicine is based on research done into Biology, Chemistry and Physics don't you?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- In your opinion, is it cruel to vacuum a spider & why?
- Worried my boss will be angry
- A level politics help
- Is Elon Musk right? AI will replace all jobs?
- What does ‘probably best’ mean here?
- Why are uni dropouts looked down on?
- will university find out in future if someone uses CHATGPT
- Getting rid of fruitflies
- unmarked school work
- how to fix my boyfriend’s smelly house?
- TOF Mass Spec
- True or false - non-STEM degrees are a waste of time?
- scared my friends are going to leave me now a levels are ending
- Rishi Sunak gives Net Zero speech: PM waters down key policy goals
- What degree do you have no respect for?
- can i remove a gcse?
- Postgraduate Grade Worries
- Can some one mark my English literature essay
- maths gcse question
- Free ocr biology and chemistry book
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day 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 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day 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 ?
