Sunak to force English universities to cap numbers of students on ‘low-value’ degrees

Still just "plans" to "ask" OfS to limit recruitment
Even the press release from the government doesn't actually give any solid details - not even the content of the letter they've written to OfS
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/crackdown-on-rip-off-university-degrees

It's just daily mail headline clickbait at the moment.

Fair, but still... although cracking on scam degrees is good... is it worth it to affect the working class?

Fair, but still... although cracking on scam degrees is good... is it worth it to affect the working class?

When you say is worth it to affect the working class, we need to remember this change would be a positive effect on them. This change could encourage them to not do degrees that leave them unemployed or struggling financially in the future. This may be the first thing this government is doing that may actually positively affect working class.

Which "scam degrees" do you think this will (eventually) affect?

You changed my view. PRSOM


Some from the worst unis like Bedfordshire, Greenwich, etc. I don't know that much about the crappiest unis from the UK but a good guess is that they'll affect it disproportionately.

Bedfordshire has an overall progression score of 67.7% - it's those below 60% that are potentially going to be asked to limit intake numbers
Greenwich is on 72.4%

The universities/colleges with the lowest scores include Norland, Kingston Maurwood, Global Banking School Ltd, Reaseheath college, the Chickenshed Theatre Trust, Nelson College London, Brit College, London School of Science and Technology, Askham Byran, London School of Management Education Ltd, Royal School of Needlework, Bishop Burton College, RTC Education Ltd, Moulton College, Mont Rose College of Management and Sciences Ltd, Myerscough College, David Game College Ltd, UCK Ltd, Sparsholt College, EKC Group, LTE Group, RNN Group, Luminate Education Group, WKCIC Group, Court Theatre Training Company Ltd and Bloomsbury Institute Ltd.

So a lot of FE colleges, a handful of specialist providers (particularly in drama and agriculture) and a LOT of private providers.

Especially from some disgusting ex polys.

This is all just needless political posturing, designed to drum up support for the Tories from two main areas - the upper (and upper middle) class who think that a degree in media studies from Bath is churning out "soldiers" in a "culture war", and the working class who think degrees in Egyptology and history of art from Oxbridge are pointless. The issue is that neither of those groups is correct and ultimately all this does is harm the overall purpose of higher education by narrowing the view to focus purely on degrees that are both "vocational" but also "traditionally academic" to satisfy both groups, i.e. the current trend of emphasising degrees in accounting, management, CS, engineering, law etc.

Which while on the surface may seem like a good thing but when you actually look at the state of the computing and legal sectors in terms of graduate employment, and how well CS and law grads (to a lesser extent the other listed degrees) fare, it's easy to see that this doesn't actually address any issues as the legal sector is already flooded with too many law grads and not enough training contracts, CS grads have consistently poor employability even within the computing sector (or generally "high skilled STEM" roles), and increasing the number of graduates in these areas do not fix the bottlenecks they face (and will just make it worse).

All this will do harm the arts, cultural and heritage fields and sectors - noting that the arts sectors are a huge business area, and a lack of creative professionals does significantly affect it. We saw this during the last writers strike in the US for example (ever wondered why big shows like Heroes and Lost started off strong nosedived? It's because all the writers were on strike for a key part of the latter seasons and audience interest massively dropped off as a result and they never recovered), and will be seeing it again with the combined WGA and SAG-AFTRA strike currently. Outside of the creative fields the heritage and cultural sectors have been under siege for years now, pushing cultural institutions like museums and libraries (not to mention universities) to aim more for "profit" rather than their intended purpose of making knowledge and culture more widely available.

Now now. Which is more pointless in your view? Golf management from Sheffield Hallam (Ex Poly) or Latin and Classics from Oxford?

Pointlessness is in the eye of the beholder.

Many of the "ex polys" actually offer far better courses with better pastoral care and better additional extras than many of the red brick universities. Prestige aside for example, MMU knocks Manchester over hands down in terms of its student offering and I speak from a family who has experience of both.

I just looked up Manchester Uni - what on earth does a degree in Film Studies and Spanish bring to the world?

Or, is education about just that - education and actually education for a purpose takes second fiddle?

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jul/14/rishi-sunak-force-english-universities-cap-low-value-degrees

On one hand it at least stops these scam degrees from affecting students' livelihoods. Especially from some disgusting ex polys. And at least brings unis to what they were - for the bright students who wanted to continue their studies, for education and self-development.

On the other hand... should the government really interfere, and is it worth the potential damage to the lower classes?

Golf management from sheffield hallam to me... i mean come on. latin and classics att least has the language skills. And plus it's oxbridge...

I thought the RG unis and Oxbridge provide great courses with the crap ex polys doing worse. Although some specialised, niche courses can aactuaally be good for eaxmple some in Teeside (Game design or something)

But well... although we can cut out scam degrees we must take care to avoid damaging the art sector too much, and etc.

The government is fine with funding apprenticeships for factory jobs it knows will not exist in the future.

https://theconversation.com/factories-of-the-future-were-spending-heavily-to-give-workers-skills-they-wont-need-by-2030-165109

But to be fair, we don't know what will be required in the future because it doesn't yet exist. The best we can do is to address the needs of now. Thankfully, the wonderful thing about the human psyche is hat it can adapt and learn new things as things progress. For example, I learned how to teach at the age of 40! Who would have thought.

I think we need to move away from the idea that we need to learn one thing and hold onto it for a life time and instead adopt a philosophy of lifetime learning knowing that the skills we have now may well be obsolete in 10 years time. But equally, knowing that soft skills such as teamwork, problem solving and good leadership are universal regardless of what area you happen to be in.

How does the government know the "low value" degrees won't be needed in the future? Also, menial labour that follows a simple pattern is almost guaranteed to be replaced very soon in the future. And if not, it'll just be outsourced.

or is delivering poor value graduates who don't have the skills or motivation to get work

To be fair, low value is currently defined as degrees that either don't see high levels of employment post graduation or degrees with high drop out rates. So either the institution is gunning for bums on seats at all costs (low value) or is delivering poor value graduates who don't have the skills or motivation to get work. In other words, low outcomes. Given universities are still largely funded by the tax payer it seems reasonable the government wants value for money.

Regardless of the value of the subject there is no point funding an institution that can't deliver. And how does anyone know what the future might hold. Perhaps we address the issues of the time when we get there and instead fund what we need right now?

Not really. The only people who can afford to study the classics at Oxbridge are the wealthy and regardless of any skills they do, a healthy dose of nepotism will seem the right.