How do we make degrees worth something again?

[Kanda]

so what you're saying is that the sole purpose of education is to make people happy little workers.

Well, what do you think they are for then?

 

[zoooo]

Ignore people with degrees, only employ those with an MA/MSc.

 

[weltweit]

frankly there's no need for so many people to enter higher education - for many people it's a complete waste of time when they could be doing something more useful. so recreating a proper system of apprenticeships for people who want to go down that path would be a useful accompaniment to other measures, like reintroducing the binary divide between polytechnics and universities, increasing the per capita funding of higher education back to the 1991 level, and reintroducing grants at 1979 levels plus bringing students back into the benefits system. this would allow for several routes to the qualifications desired, plus broaden the range of people applying for higher education - since the introduction of loans and tuition fees the proportion of working class people entering higher education hasn't increased anything like it should and graduating in debt understandably puts off large numbers of youngsters. also scrap shite subjects like media studies which in any event is a sub-subject within sociology. scrap the pressure on academics to publish research for the sake of publishing research and fund an increase of academic staff to improve the ratio of staff to students. the biggest problem with higher education is that the bean-counters have taken over and everything's about money now.

Why scrap media studies PM, when people obviously want to do it? And why is it a "crap shite" subject?

 

[Pickman's model]

Why scrap media studies PM, when people obviously want to do it? And why is it a "crap shite" subject?

part of the expansion of higher education has been the creation of a range of new subjects, many of which have scant intellectual validity. part of the reason people apply for courses like media studies is that they sound sexy, when in fact they are in general vacuous and fail several tests of whether a subject is viable for pursuit at higher education, including but not limited to the lack of existence of a school of media studies outside the academy, the poor employment choices for graduates of the course, the dismal body of literature of the subject.

and please don't make up quotes you attribute to me, especially when you quote the post in which they don't appear.

 

[weltweit]

part of the expansion of higher education has been the creation of a range of new subjects, many of which have scant intellectual validity. part of the reason people apply for courses like media studies is that they sound sexy, when in fact they are in general vacuous and fail several tests of whether a subject is viable for pursuit at higher education, including but not limited to the lack of existence of a school of media studies outside the academy, the poor employment choices for graduates of the course, the dismal body of literature of the subject.

So you are not in complete disagreement with me, if a course has poor employment choices (or chances) that could be taken into account as to whether it is a valid or worthwhile course for students to take.

and please don't make up quotes you attribute to me, especially when you quote the post in which they don't appear.

I didn't make up any quotes from you, you wrote that on the previous page, I just hit the quote button and underlined the bit I wanted to emphasise. Is there a problem with that?

 

[Pickman's model]

Not the sole purpose no.

But study all the way to degree and then find your can't get a job seems a bit of a shame.

Or be an employer and find that there are not people qualified to take on, equally a shame.

Presently, with students paying fees themselves, they can of course study whatever they want, they are paying the bill after all.

several points.

firstly, the point of a degree is not, or shouldn't be, as a finishing school for a job. it should be about exploring and expanding your intellectual horizons. it should be first and foremost about personal development, while it is up to the individual to decide what course to pursue after their degree. it is for people to learn how to think and to research independently. it is not to make people into square pegs for square holes.

second, if employers want people who are adequately qualified, then they shouldn't make a degree a prerequisite for a range of increasingly menial tasks.

third, if employers want people who are adequately qualified, then employers should themselves make a contribution towards the cost of educating their staff.

 

[Pickman's model]

I didn't make up any quotes from you, you wrote that on the previous page, I just hit the quote button and underlined the bit I wanted to emphasise. Is there a problem with that?

please point to the post where i described media studies as "crap shite"

 

[weltweit]

Oh do you mean because I mistakendly wrote crap not scrap, if so ok, that is my mistake.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

what about something along the lines of abandoning the stupid idea of having 50% of people having experience of higher education which played such a big part in fucking up higher education in the first place?

This, really.

I don't think a degree is worth any less now, I think that information is more readily accessible.

Not sure if they're worth less. In a lot of companies though, they've become the default qualification you need. My dad started working for the company he worked for most of his life after just getting a handful of O-Levels. By the time he took early retirement, people entering at levels below at what he had started at needed a degree to be considered. I don't think that's the best state of affairs.

do you honestly believe that people generally enter higher education with any sort of skills in the discovery or evaluation of information found online?

Well, tbf with the increase of online databases, they'll have to learn soon after they start!

I think a motivated student could achieve a degree without attending lectures, the information is all there in the Uni library for anyone to hunt out.

In fact it has been claimed in past discussions that lecturing standards ay Oxbridge were far weaker than in many other establishments but this did not matter because the students were so motivated they found out the information on their own.

This reminds me of a German friend who is a little older than me, who said that in her day, an undergrad there was a lot more like independent study. And peopel could take years completing them.

 

[weltweit]

several points.

firstly, the point of a degree is not, or shouldn't be, as a finishing school for a job. it should be about exploring and expanding your intellectual horizons. it should be first and foremost about personal development, while it is up to the individual to decide what course to pursue after their degree. it is for people to learn how to think and to research independently. it is not to make people into square pegs for square holes.

Well my experience was a little different. I did my vocational degree at a Polytechnic and they prided themselves that the degree produced suitably qualified workers for industry and engineering. It was a four year sandwich and in the third year we had to get jobs relevant to our degrees. There were two parralel courses, one targetting the textile industry of which there was a lot in that part of the country and the other course (mine) targetting engineering and industry.

I considered myself very lucky to get on such a career focussed degree, before it my employment prospects were very limited, after it I had enormously improved chances.

It has obviously influenced my views about FE & HE.

second, if employers want people who are adequately qualified, then they shouldn't make a degree a prerequisite for a range of increasingly menial tasks.

I agree.

third, if employers want people who are adequately qualified, then employers should themselves make a contribution towards the cost of educating their staff.

Well the employers I have had have made an ongoing investment into training, some more than others.

I think many employers think that general taxation should be enough to provide for education and that the products of education should be "employable".

 

[Pickman's model]

but if people are paying tuition fees for higher education, then that's clearly not coming from general taxation, is it?

 

[Agent Sparrow]

It does always strike me that my uncle, who is afaik the first person in my family to go to uni from school, would have never dreamed of going if there weren't good grants and there were fees to pay.

And I doubt I could have done my post grad if I wasn't lucky enough to get on a funded course.

 

[weltweit]

but if people are paying tuition fees for higher education, then that's clearly not coming from general taxation, is it?

Indeed fee paying does complicate the picture.

But perhaps even more of a shame if after paying through the nose to do a degree you still find you can't get a job!

As far as I know, it is only a small number of Universities that even monitor the employment performance after their many and various degree courses.

Any academic I have challenged with the question "why don't you publish employment stats on your various courses?" has looked at me as if I were the very devil incarnate

But students are now customers, they pay. Why should they not have access to this sort of information on which to make their choices?

 

[Pickman's model]

if you really want that sort of information, you ought to know that the academics to whom you've spoken won't have the data at their fingertips. i don't get the impression you've given the matter any serious thought.

 

[weltweit]

It does always strike me that my uncle, who is afaik the first person in my family to go to uni from school, would have never dreamed of going if there weren't good grants and there were fees to pay.

And I doubt I could have done my post grad if I wasn't lucky enough to get on a funded course.

Yes, iirc I had a grant for fees and my parents helped me also, I think if I had the level of debt to look forward to that current students have I might not have had the confidence to go through with it.

 

[JohnnyOrange]

Indeed fee paying does complicate the picture.

But perhaps even more of a shame if after paying through the nose to do a degree you still find you can't get a job!

Why? Was it less of a shame when the State paid for you and you still didn't get a job? That doesn't make sense. Neither does the idea that paying for an education means you're more entitle to the job you want.

As far as I know, it is only a small number of Universities that even monitor the employment performance after their many and various degree courses.

Any academic I have challenged with the question "why don't you publish employment stats on your various courses?" has looked at me as if I were the very devil incarnate

All universities monitor these stats as far as they can, it's in the interest of their marketing. Academics don't, but they're not the marketing department.

 

[Pickman's model]

All universities monitor these stats as far as they can, it's in the interest of their marketing. Academics don't, but they're not the marketing department.

exactly.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

But students are now customers, they pay. Why should they not have access to this sort of information on which to make their choices?

From what I've heard, that's actually quite a potential problem re: the discouragement of independent learning. Some students today expect to be a bit more spoon fed, because they're paying for the service.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Yes, iirc I had a grant for fees and my parents helped me also, I think if I had the level of debt to look forward to that current students have I might not have had the confidence to go through with it.

I was lucky enough to be the last year before fees were introduced. I think I still would have done it, but it would have been much harder to do.

 

[weltweit]

if you really want that sort of information, you ought to know that the academics to whom you've spoken won't have the data at their fingertips. i don't get the impression you've given the matter any serious thought.

tbh I am now used to being ridiculed for my ideas on this so I don't generally push it too far either with Academics or with some relatives who are of the same mind.

I do think that information could be very useful for prospective students.

It would certainly focus minds, if I am going to get into £Xk debt on course Y which only has employment chances of Z, when I could do course ABC which has much better employment prospects of EDF... I think it could be very useful.

 

[weltweit]

Why? Was it less of a shame when the State paid for you and you still didn't get a job? That doesn't make sense. Neither does the idea that paying for an education means you're more entitle to the job you want.

Yes, I see what you are saying.

 

[weltweit]

but if people are paying tuition fees for higher education, then that's clearly not coming from general taxation, is it?

But larger companies do spend more on recruitment certainly, I don't know any stats on training. If you are suggesting employers should invest more in training for work, where would that leave smaller and middle sized companies who perhaps have less resources?

 

[Mation]

what about something along the lines of abandoning the stupid idea of having 50% of people having experience of higher education which played such a big part in fucking up higher education in the first place?

Yep.

frankly there's no need for so many people to enter higher education - for many people it's a complete waste of time when they could be doing something more useful. so recreating a proper system of apprenticeships for people who want to go down that path would be a useful accompaniment to other measures, like reintroducing the binary divide between polytechnics and universities, increasing the per capita funding of higher education back to the 1991 level, and reintroducing grants at 1979 levels plus bringing students back into the benefits system. this would allow for several routes to the qualifications desired, plus broaden the range of people applying for higher education - since the introduction of loans and tuition fees the proportion of working class people entering higher education hasn't increased anything like it should and graduating in debt understandably puts off large numbers of youngsters. also scrap shite subjects like media studies which in any event is a sub-subject within sociology. scrap the pressure on academics to publish research for the sake of publishing research and fund an increase of academic staff to improve the ratio of staff to students. the biggest problem with higher education is that the bean-counters have taken over and everything's about money now.

Yes. With the addition of somehow increasing the status/worth of vocational training. It's essential that some people can do practical stuff and it should be treated as such.

I don't think a degree is worth any less now, I think that information is more readily accessible. I also think they should make degrees harder to counter this.

With the internet etc, learning has become a fuckton easier.

Same with GCSE's and A levels.

How? Just because the information is available, doesn't mean everyone knows how to get it or use it appropriately for their purpose. It's like taking reference books into exams. Those exams are arguably harder than memorising answers, becasue you need to know what to look up, what is relevant, under pressure.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

Lots of interesting responses

Or would you return to the elitist education system we had where only the chosen few could study to degree level?

Well, er, yes, I supposed that is what I am advocating. But I would want to be less 'elitist' in how I 'chose' the 'few'.......

 

[weltweit]

I don't want it going back to a small elite doing degrees, however that elite is chosen.

What I don't fully understand is why the Polytechnics were renamed into Universities.

My understanding (I went to a Polytechnic in 85-89) was that Polytechnics were for practical subjects and vocational degrees and Universities were for academia.

Now there are just loads of Universities, how are students supposed to make sense of them all when they are trying to select ones to apply to?

 

[kabbes]

An academic degree should be worth nothing more than the value of having the opportunity to study something you are interested in for three years.

If the working world wants people to have "qualifications" then that shouldn't be mixed up with this academic discipline.

 

[weltweit]

An academic degree should be worth nothing more than the value of having the opportunity to study something you are interested in for three years.

If the working world wants people to have "qualifications" then that shouldn't be mixed up with this academic discipline.

Are you saying you agree with returning to Polytechnic - practical / University - academic?

 

[kabbes]

Are you saying you agree with returning to Polytechnic - practical / University - academic?

I'm saying that a massive change in mindset is needed before we start messing with the practicalities of how the desired structure is achieved. As long as people continue to go down the route of increasingly thinking of a degree as nothing more than a piece of paper to achieve the job they want, we will continue to see the "value" of a degree in and of itself be eroded.

 

[weltweit]

I'm saying that a massive change in mindset is needed before we start messing with the practicalities of how the desired structure is achieved. As long as people continue to go down the route of increasingly thinking of a degree as nothing more than a piece of paper to achieve the job they want, we will continue to see the "value" of a degree in and of itself be eroded.

You and I have had this debate before kabbes, you know my opinion which is that education should prepare you for life and part of life is employment.

 

[_angel_]

I don't want it going back to a small elite doing degrees, however that elite is chosen.

I don't either.

I think the thing is employers making a degree essential for jobs where they are not so that people "have" to have one. That is different to discouraging people per se from doing them, though.

In other words, people should do them because they want to, not because they've become a mandatory part of getting almost any job.

(Having said that there are plenty of jobs that might as well put their training into a degree form)