ks.234
Half way to Infinity
Is it fair to impeach the whole country? Perhaps just those who still think he's wonderful?
'Best' Universities to charge more.. Discuss.
- Thread starter Mullardman
- Start date
Is it fair to impeach the whole country? Perhaps just those who still think he's wonderful?
Minstrel SE
These go to eleven
I do understand all about post graduate courses and experience Mull. Ive seen people who have never left the education system.
Im saying that the actual course has become far more important. Im saying that people are being expected to hit the ground running with less opportunities around..
Im saying that knowledge for the sake of knowledge doesnt cut it anymore. Valuable knowledge and skills are essentially what people will pay for. Thats the crucial bit you dont seem to grasp in your defence of the education system
Joe Hutch
Mate of the bloke
The debate about what constitutes 'useful' knowledge has been going on for centuries now, and will probably never be concluded. In the specific issue under discussion here, the question is how should HE be funded, given that a much higher proportion are going into HE than was the case 15 or more years ago.
The cost has been shifted from local and central government on to students and their parents, so it matters more now than it used to whether the degrees those students obtain will a) make the time and expense worthwhile and b) enable them to earn enough to pay off their student loans. If b) doesn't happen in sufficiently large numbers, the student loans will have to be written off in whole or part, neatly shoving the burden back on to taxpayers.
There is a polite fiction that all universities are equal, and that all degrees are equally valuable. No-one actually believes that any more, if they ever did, so what is the answer? Oxbridge could probably charge double the current fee levels and still be over-subscribed, but I doubt that some lesser universities could get away with charging much more than the current going rate; the sums would no longer work out for prospective students.
The answer surely has to be a two-tier, or even three-tier system, where some institutions effectively revert to being polytechnics, offering vocational courses to mostly home-based students. Industry could chip in by funding sandwich courses, with the twin benefits of bringing more money into the system and enabling industry to recruit graduates whose skills and knowledge more closely match their requirements. Another tier would be teaching universities, and the top tier would be a small number of research-intensive institutions. At the moment, every university wants to 'do' research, because a) that's where the money is and b) that's what attracts the best staff.
Politics may make the above unworkable, but I can't see a better way of squaring the circle of relatively fixed demand for, but an ever-increasing supply of graduates.
The cost has been shifted from local and central government on to students and their parents, so it matters more now than it used to whether the degrees those students obtain will a) make the time and expense worthwhile and b) enable them to earn enough to pay off their student loans. If b) doesn't happen in sufficiently large numbers, the student loans will have to be written off in whole or part, neatly shoving the burden back on to taxpayers.
There is a polite fiction that all universities are equal, and that all degrees are equally valuable. No-one actually believes that any more, if they ever did, so what is the answer? Oxbridge could probably charge double the current fee levels and still be over-subscribed, but I doubt that some lesser universities could get away with charging much more than the current going rate; the sums would no longer work out for prospective students.
The answer surely has to be a two-tier, or even three-tier system, where some institutions effectively revert to being polytechnics, offering vocational courses to mostly home-based students. Industry could chip in by funding sandwich courses, with the twin benefits of bringing more money into the system and enabling industry to recruit graduates whose skills and knowledge more closely match their requirements. Another tier would be teaching universities, and the top tier would be a small number of research-intensive institutions. At the moment, every university wants to 'do' research, because a) that's where the money is and b) that's what attracts the best staff.
Politics may make the above unworkable, but I can't see a better way of squaring the circle of relatively fixed demand for, but an ever-increasing supply of graduates.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
Where do you see plumbing and hairdressing fitting in?
Joe Hutch
Mate of the bloke
As moonlighting jobs to pay the tuition fees, obvs.
stephen bennett
Mr Enigma
That's because a medical degree is, in the main, a vocational course. It's basically learning posh plumbing.
It helps employability stats from a university if they have one on offer though—nearly 100% into a 'graduate level job!'
However, most jobs are filled by the types of skills gained by graduates on humanities degrees. It's all valid education.
I actually agree with you. I think we need medical schools, polytechnics, vocational and life long learning in FE colleges and universities not the mish-mash we have now. FE colleges will now become universities too if they want to survive—and the white paper encourages this.
Stephen
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
I thought this was a thread about tuition fees, it seems to be turning into a 'my degree's better than yours' squabble.
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-36341618 if you want to know where those tuition fees are going
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-36341618 if you want to know where those tuition fees are going
Minstrel SE
These go to eleven
As university education is no longer free it therefore bocomes critical to actually discuss what is on offer. It certainly isnt going off topic to suggest that many of these course simply are not worth the money.
It happens at all levels from university downwards. They are quite happy to take the money without really making the student aware that there is damn all chance of making a living from it.
I though that was what we had or at least had when I was in HE in the early 80s? I agree with you that this is the best system. City and Guilds. I did an ONC and HNC during my early days with British Telecom (the yellow years). It was always so obvious that by expecting half the country to get degrees they no longer had the cache they had when only 10% did them. I think the "correct" number is somewhere between those figures.
How well qualified do you need to be to made an amplifier? or design/copy one? or design a better one? or understand what new technologies are around to design a radical new one? These fall into the levels of education described.
As for studying fashion........as my girlfriend is still involved in the business I am pretty up to speed. It is as tricky as ever to get into. Most companies expect experience but you will only get this as an unpaid intern. Not many can afford to live in London (for example) and work for nothing so the people coming through become self selecting. This isn't to say they aren't creative but look at the most creative designers over the years and they don't come from money.
She is working with one young designer who works full time and makes a part of his collection at home after work. He is as talented as anyone but the big designers won't pick him up because of his lack of design room experience. We do our bits to help but it is really hard work. As with most businesses it isn't always the most talented who succeed. He is an RCA Masters graduate. This gave him a great set of skills but his natural eye is what raises him above the norm.
gintonic
50 shades of grey pussy cats
I work for an ex Poly, I have also worked at a Russell Group HEI and a red brick in my 25 years and counting career. All I can say in my experience that with regard to academic rigour, my current employer, the ex-poly, applies higher standards of rigour than all the others. We are all subject to external scrutiny by various bodies including both government and professional.
In my current role, I have contact with a number of large companies (many of whom are household names and are considered top notch companies to work for) who recruit our graduates and many of them are starting to use anonymous application methods for graduate jobs. Applicants are not required to state their name, gender, degree classification , or University awarding the degree on their CV or application form. Applicants do have to jump through a number of assessment centre hurdles before reaching interview stage, but selection is done on an anonymous basis.
Without fail, all the companies report getting a much more well rounded work force than using more traditional methods.
My wife is a group head in a large engineering company and is involved with recruiting graduate engineers and scientists for her group. Graduates she recruits start on a salary of just under £30k, so as you can imagine the competition is intense. She tells me that Russell Group graduates find it easier to get trough their assessment centres to interview stage more easily than graduates from red bricks or post-92's, but that those from the latter two types of HEI perform far better at interview and make much better employees than Russel Group graduates.
In my current role, I have contact with a number of large companies (many of whom are household names and are considered top notch companies to work for) who recruit our graduates and many of them are starting to use anonymous application methods for graduate jobs. Applicants are not required to state their name, gender, degree classification , or University awarding the degree on their CV or application form. Applicants do have to jump through a number of assessment centre hurdles before reaching interview stage, but selection is done on an anonymous basis.
Without fail, all the companies report getting a much more well rounded work force than using more traditional methods.
My wife is a group head in a large engineering company and is involved with recruiting graduate engineers and scientists for her group. Graduates she recruits start on a salary of just under £30k, so as you can imagine the competition is intense. She tells me that Russell Group graduates find it easier to get trough their assessment centres to interview stage more easily than graduates from red bricks or post-92's, but that those from the latter two types of HEI perform far better at interview and make much better employees than Russel Group graduates.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
Still too simplistic an analysis of the worth of courses. But, I will say yet again, the current dearth of proper advice and guidance (Thank you Mr Gove.. you f$%^&=g moron..) is a real factor in this. I very rarely met a potential HE student.. even the brightest.. who really had a clue how to choose a HE course.
Partially true, in the sense that there are limited opportunities for work in some subject areas. But that has always been the case. A good degree in any subject is still better than no degree. Again though, proper guidance used to minimise the damage.
Mull