Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Outside of the arts, there are very few internationally successful people from the West without a degree.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shady lane)
    Outside of the arts, there are very few internationally successful people from the West without a degree.
    What do you mean by 'internationally successful'? Most of the rich list aren't graduates. If you mean academically, well I think that kind of answers itself - but I fail to see what that proves.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Few on the level of William Shakespeare are without degrees. He was used as the example. Although as I've said, the arts are different. For every Richard Branson, there are hundreds of equally wealthy businessmen WITH degrees. Even the times when a non-degree holding computer genius can make millions (see Bill Gates) have past.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I agree about media studies - not that I don't quite see the point of it, per se, because hey, people can study whatever they like - but if you're really interested in film - do film studies - and if you're doing it because you want to work in the media - do English!
    Just, as an example, Andrew Graham Dixon is now an art critic and TV presenter. Now, History of Art is a respected degree, but doing English and maintaining a private interest in HoA is probably more likely to get you a good job, as English is more respected, much more competitive, and shows the same skills you need for HoA. (Though he obviously wouldn't have gotten the job if he couldn't also prove himself as a worthy art critic.)

    Unless media studies gives you some damn good life skills - you're better off doing something else.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I hope they also did a study into over academic subjects which have much less relevence then the courses on this list? Classics, Latin, History of Art... As a small business owner would I seriously consider these degrees more valuable then somebody who has done golf studies - The course states they learn some CAD skills and accounting. The golf studies student will clearly be more handy.


    Saying that I would not employ either of them. I would go forgrads from the sciences, maths, management/economics and computer science subject lists - Clearly where all the money making brains are!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigboy123)
    I hope they also did a study into over academic subjects which have much less relevence then the courses on this list? Classics, Latin, History of Art... As a small business owner would I seriously consider these degrees more valuable then somebody who has done golf studies - The course states they learn some CAD skills and accounting. The golf studies student will clearly be more handy.


    Saying that I would not employ either of them. I would go forgrads from the sciences, maths, management/economics and computer science subject lists - Clearly where all the money making brains are!
    You could theoretically argue this - but it's all about name brand and the general quality of the candidates that would have done such courses in the eyes of employer I'm afraid. My aunt invariably used to say of the servants she has had at home "Oh she can clean well but she's no legal secretary" (this is a loose translation of the Spanish).. So by the same token an employer could say "He can add and subtract but he's no classical scholar" - it's just a different level of eduction and intellect regardless of whether they've studied a little accounting or whatever. In the long run this superficial knowledge is not going to be any use to the employer whereas someone with a good degree in an intellectually challenging subject can pretty much adapt to anything. Employers don't always like people coming to their firms with preconceived ideas about how things are meant to be run - more important are people that can learn and adapt to the job at hand.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vickytoria77)
    I think for some subjects, a qualification of any kind is needed, but for others you cannot beat practical experience like some of the equine degrees for example.

    Having worked in the equine sector for nearly 3 years, at a yard that offered hands on tutition, I knew far more about some stuff than the students who had just graduated with a degree. Have also discussed it at length with my boss regarding degrees within the equine sector and she's got some strong feelings about how it's far better to learn on the job for vocational subjects than being stuck in a 3hr lecture.
    I definately agree with this. I have ridden for 15 years and have a few friends that have gone to do equine studies and I have to say that I don't think that they no an awful lot more than they I know. In fact, I don't even think they know much more than they did to start with.I didn't realise this was an actually degree either I thought it was an NVQ or a certificate. It seems that a large majority of what they classify as non-degree courses are equine related.

    Although I despise the snobery surrounding so called 'mickey mouse' degrees and ex-polys I must say that there is a part of me that believes that for a course such as equine studies which involves a lot more practical work it is slightly less 'academic' per se. As suggested I don't feel that lectures and seminars are the best way of teaching the students of this course.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucho22)
    You could theoretically argue this - but it's all about name brand and the general quality of the candidates that would have done such courses in the eyes of employer I'm afraid. My aunt invariably used to say of the servants she has had at home "Oh she can clean well but she's no legal secretary" (this is a loose translation of the Spanish).. So by the same token an employer could say "He can add and subtract but he's no classical scholar" - it's just a different level of eduction and intellect regardless of whether they've studied a little accounting or whatever. In the long run this superficial knowledge is not going to be any use to the employer whereas someone with a good degree in an intellectually challenging subject can pretty much adapt to anything. Employers don't always like people coming to their firms with preconceived ideas about how things are meant to be run - more important are people that can learn and adapt to the job at hand.
    I fail to see your point, learning classics does not make you a better learner, I argue the speed your able to adapt and learn new skills at can not be taught through learning Virgil Roman poetry any better than learning the science behind making a golf club. How are subjects on this list any more "superficial knowledge" then classics, History of Art etc.

    If you’re labeling useful day to day skills "superficial knowledge" then you should also label classics as irrelevant knowledge.

    The real issue is not wether these courses should exist its if they should be labeled a degree?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigboy123)
    I fail to see your point, learning classics does not make you a better learner, I argue the speed your able to adapt and learn new skills at can not be taught through learning Virgil Roman poetry any better than learning the science behind making a golf club. How are subjects on this list any more "superficial knowledge" then classics, History of Art etc.

    If you’re labeling useful day to day skills "superficial knowledge" then you should also label classics as irrelevant knowledge.

    The real issue is not wether these courses should exist its if they should be labeled a degree?
    You're completely failing to see my point... What I'm saying is that doing Golf Studies and knowing a smattering of accounting is utterly pointless in the long term as it most certainly isn't going to get them a job in accounting and at that sort of level it's not something an intelligent fellow who has read something like classics couldn't easily pick up. Irrelevant as the knowledge may be in the world of work, a rigorous study of classics will teach people how to think critically and logically which is far more important. We forget most of the facts we learn but the mental agility and thought processes remain. The employer will choose the classicist with a good degree 100% of the time I'm nearly positive...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucho22)
    The employer will choose the classicist with a good degree 100% of the time I'm nearly positive...
    Irrelevant to whether something should be the subject of academic study though, isn't it, at the end of the day? Also I suspect things are quite as convincing as you believe. I've seen similar arguments made against subjects like classics by people with science degrees, doesn't mean that the subject is worthless. What you assume is that the golf studies graduate is full of facts and specific skills, but completely devoid of the soft skills possessed by classics graduates, why? Surely the high level study of anything requires a critical and logical approach? The fact that I have not studied an arts subject doesn't mean I am some how lacking, does it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=ChemistBoy]Irrelevant to whether something should be the subject of academic study though, isn't it, at the end of the day? Also I suspect things are quite as convincing as you believe. I've seen similar arguments made against subjects like classics by people with science degrees, doesn't mean that the subject is worthless. What you assume is that the golf studies graduate is full of facts and specific skills, but completely devoid of the soft skills possessed by classics graduates, why? Surely the high level study of anything requires a critical and logical approach? The fact that I have not studied an arts subject doesn't mean I am some how lacking, does it?[/QUOTE]

    Well I would probably hazard a guess that you are lacking in critical analysis, inference of text skills etc in comparision to an Oxbridge classics student if you have studied a Science subject. As these types of skills are not the main focus of Science degrees, this does not mean these skills are not required just that they will not be developed to the same level.

    Before everyone jumps on me for trying to undermine Science subjects I definatly am not. I am going to be studying an arts degree but have complete and utter respect for those studying in Science and Maths as they possess skills that I do not. However to try and undermine arts subjects by saying "well everyone can think" is just a little lazy I think.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Well I would probably hazard a guess that you are lacking in critical analysis, inference of text skills etc in comparision to an Oxbridge classics student if you have studied a Science subject. As these types of skills are not the main focus of Science degrees, this does not mean these skills are not required just that they will not be developed to the same level.

    Before everyone jumps on me for trying to undermine Science subjects I definatly am not. I am going to be studying an arts degree but have complete and utter respect for those studying in Science and Maths as they possess skills that I do not. However to try and undermine arts subjects by saying "well everyone can think" is just a little lazy I think.[/QUOTE]

    100% is a big figure to quote, what if they are interviewing for a management job at a golf course? I find it very unlikely a classics and golf studies student would be applying for the same jobs anyway making this argument irrelivent.

    If there is a demand for these degrees in the industry then they will continue to be offered, thats the beauty of a free economy.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucho22)
    You're completely failing to see my point... What I'm saying is that doing Golf Studies and knowing a smattering of accounting is utterly pointless in the long term as it most certainly isn't going to get them a job in accounting and at that sort of level it's not something an intelligent fellow who has read something like classics couldn't easily pick up. Irrelevant as the knowledge may be in the world of work, a rigorous study of classics will teach people how to think critically and logically which is far more important. We forget most of the facts we learn but the mental agility and thought processes remain. The employer will choose the classicist with a good degree 100% of the time I'm nearly positive...

    100% is a big figure to quote, what if they are interviewing for a management job at a golf course? I find it very unlikely a classics and golf studies student would be applying for the same jobs anyway making this argument irrelevant.

    If there is a demand for these degrees in the industry then they will continue to be offered, that’s the beauty of a free economy.

    as Chemist Boy says, you shouldn't assume that there are no soft skills learnt in golf studies, there is every chance the course contains physics/biology modules that are also taken by science students.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon123)
    Well I would probably hazard a guess that you are lacking in critical analysis, inference of text skills etc in comparision to an Oxbridge classics student if you have studied a Science subject. As these types of skills are not the main focus of Science degrees, this does not mean these skills are not required just that they will not be developed to the same level.

    Before everyone jumps on me for trying to undermine Science subjects I definatly am not. I am going to be studying an arts degree but have complete and utter respect for those studying in Science and Maths as they possess skills that I do not. However to try and undermine arts subjects by saying "well everyone can think" is just a little lazy I think.
    My point is that a science graduate is still highly employable in generic graduate jobs despite not having as highly a developed critical approach to literature, because having such skills are an academic specialism, not generic of graduates doing traditional academic subjects. I realise that there are obviously things that are developed to a high level in an arts degree, but that doesn't mean that they are things that are neccessarily highly desirable to have by employers at the level to which they are obtained (the same is true of all degrees). However the level of development of critical and logical skills and the ability to read and analyse text is developed sufficiently well in science graduates (and I would say all graduates) so that they can function in the world of work generally where they have to read and write reports, etc.

    Remember that the cornerstone of the argument against these new subjects is that they do not provide the soft skills that traditional subjects do, but these have to be demonstrably soft, generic skills not academic specialities. A highly developed critical approach to literature is most definitely not a graduate soft skill, it is an academic specialism.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I am actually torn by that Telegraph article. I used to get really angry when people called A-level Psychology a mickey-mouse subject, when it was arguably the subject I took which required the most academic rigour (whereas English Language apparently is not a "soft" subject, yet I barely had to revise for that in comparison).

    However, I have to agree with the article on a lot of points. How is something like "Adventure Studies" academic was the main thing I was looking at. I mean some of those subjects are a bit of a joke, they're practical skills courses, which in the technical sense isn't a degree. And I'm not at all elitist, and am the first to knock people down a peg, but I do think its a waste of tax payers' money for some of them (like a lot of things though in this country). Its not the University or student fault though, it would definitely the industry for actually demanding a degree for specialised positions such as golf management. I think its just an example of the way things are heading, where everyone has a degree in something.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BornUnderPunches)
    I agree about media studies - not that I don't quite see the point of it, per se, because hey, people can study whatever they like - but if you're really interested in film - do film studies - and if you're doing it because you want to work in the media - do English!
    Just, as an example, Andrew Graham Dixon is now an art critic and TV presenter. Now, History of Art is a respected degree, but doing English and maintaining a private interest in HoA is probably more likely to get you a good job, as English is more respected, much more competitive, and shows the same skills you need for HoA. (Though he obviously wouldn't have gotten the job if he couldn't also prove himself as a worthy art critic.)

    Unless media studies gives you some damn good life skills - you're better off doing something else.
    I never did understand why HoA is more respected then a degree such as film studies. They are both similar in terms of content, one focuses on the impact paintings had during its time, and tries to analyze why certain paintings were formed the way they were, whilst the other focuses on the cultural impacts of films.

    Yet film studies is considered to be a doss subject - at my university anyway.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    You have to understand that there isn't really any point in a Golf Management degree as its something that can be picked up as you go along. If you want to manage a golf course, why waste three years at uni getting yourself deeper in dept when you can simply go to the golf course and get a job learning about it from the people themselves. In that case, you are more likely to get the job in three years as the employers will know you, know that you are a hard worker etc and can do the job easily as you have been on the site for all that time.
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Dude)
    simply go to the golf course and get a job learning about it from the people themselves.
    Really? It's that simple is it.

    Someone get on the phone to Birmingham - the demand they had from employers for their golf management degree was faked.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That's right. I heard in the news too that Hoylake and St. Andrews asked Universities to create courses for people to be qualified to manage their golf courses too.

    Get a grip.

    Would they prefer a 21 year old with a golf management course or a 35 year old man with professional experience in golf, ten years under their belt for management and probably some chairman/woman experience ina club? Furthermore, having membership to that particular club maybe an advantage.

    And where you might insist the 21 year old with the degree under their belt may make more money with their business plans, strategies etc.. you obviously have no idea what the sport is about.

    -----

    But to the subject in general, some of these degrees are not ridiculous. Fashion Buying for example. I have a friend doing this course at Man Met and she LOVES this course. It would be hard to take some of these courses away that a personally believe, a lot of people would still enjoy.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by princess_bratty)
    Would they prefer a 21 year old with a golf management course or a 35 year old man with professional experience in golf, ten years under their belt for management and probably some chairman/woman experience ina club? Furthermore, having membership to that particular club maybe an advantage.

    And where you might insist the 21 year old with the degree under their belt may make more money with their business plans, strategies etc.. you obviously have no idea what the sport is about.
    Why create this scenario and act as if it is the only scenario that will occur? Newsflash: Experience always trumps a degree - that's why so many graduates enter jobs specifically tailored for them (i.e. graduate recruitment schemes) and so trying to make out that this is a reason why golf management degrees are not worthwhile (in comparison to other degrees) is a bit silly. I don't know many chairpersons of golf clubs that would be interested in a graduate-type business role in the club generally because they either a) own the club, b) are retired, c) have another, much better job (from my experience of being a member of a few golf clubs). The course at birmingham leads to PGA status, which, if you know your golf, is an important thing to have as a young person entering the industry and you get specific training directly by the PGA. The typical offers are ABB - BBB so there aren't many dosers on this course either.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
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
  • create my feed
  • edit my feed

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.