University Loans

[Gwadien]

Clearly, University loans weren't working in the point of view of the Government, but with this new legislation getting discussed, I can't help but feel University will become more about the end goal of a job, rather than long-term academics and such?

Goals, rather than education?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28528824

 

[Job]

Looks like they are digging deeper into the shit..universities need a total overhaul..they are in the same boat as the library and the march of irrelevance is upon them.

 

[Raven]

The end goal of a degree should be employment.

Not that most degrees actually mean anything any more. Shelf stacking at Tesco with a degree in media or some shit, etc.

What they need to do is focus more on relevant degrees that actually have a purpose rather than just put off working for another 3 years.

 

[Scouse]

Unfortunately, as we become more and more rightwing, education has lost it's pretence of being something that people partake in which enables them to be happy, well-adjusted lifelong learners with a rounded knowledge of the world. People who are a pleasure to interact with and enrich our lives and the lives of people around them. It is now simply a tool for pumping out drones for use by <insert industry here>.

A nice example of this was Maggie Thatcher, a chemist by education, turning her nose up to a student who studied indigenous peoples and their customs with the words "what a luxury".

Luxury? You're giving the game away there Maggie. It seems that something that doesn't have any immediate use to your corporate sponsors is irrelevant - and it obviously has no intrinsic value as knowledge about the human race itself is clearly worthless, as are the people who study it. Nice to see her chemistry education was put to good use tho eh?




Edit:

The end goal of a degree should be employment.

Right-wing Raven hitting the ball out of the park there I see

 

[Raven]

Its not right wing. Do you actually believe spending 3 years on the piss courtesy of the state while pretending to learn all about urban anthropology or some bollocks rounds a person off? Either Unicorns really do shit rainbows where you live or you mix in some very peculiar circles.

Most degrees are utterly useless both from an employment point of view and a political, social or whatever the fuck it is you think people need higher education for point of view, because they teach you absolutely nothing of value for anything whatsoever.

 

[leggy]

You seem to have forgotten about Research and the value that adds - Where would we be without thinkers and researchers like Richard Feynman?. The end goal of 'University' is not just employment - never has and never will be. I don't disagree that there are some hideous degrees out there but we have vocational education for a reason.

 

[Raven]

ofc we do, which is why universities should focus on "proper" degrees and stop padding out the numbers with dross, at least then the loans would get paid back and there would be less of a problem, less of a funding gap.

 

[Scouse]

urban anthropology or some bollocks.....
....absolutely nothing of value....

Spoiler

Well done Raven my boy! Well done!

Three things:

1) Who are you to decide what value something is? Or is "value" something that can only be derived based on what industry says is valuable to it's very narrow interests?

2) Students now pay their own fees. Yet all society benefits from their larglely self-funded higher educational attainment. Surely if they find interest in something and fund themselves (getting themselves into a high level of debt to follow that interest) they deserve support, not derision?

3) You've been to Uni, right. So you're speaking from a position of authority and experience about what value the multiplicity of stupid-sounding courses (anthropology, funerary archaeology, peace studies) hold, right?

Or are you just quoting the opinions of tabloid newspapers or the uneducated "man down the pub"...?

 

[fettoken]

Oh good. Here comes the aftermath of Gwads happy student party/orgie threads.

 

[DaGaffer]

Its not right wing. Do you actually believe spending 3 years on the piss courtesy of the state while pretending to learn all about urban anthropology or some bollocks rounds a person off? Either Unicorns really do shit rainbows where you live or you mix in some very peculiar circles.

Most degrees are utterly useless both from an employment point of view and a political, social or whatever the fuck it is you think people need higher education for point of view, because they teach you absolutely nothing of value for anything whatsoever.

That's a ridiculously over-simplified argument. Apart from anything else, the ONE thing a university degree is supposed to do is give you an ability for critical thinking; someone studying Classics at Oxford has, on paper, a "useless" degree, but in reality they'll probably be pulling in six figures at a bank two years after graduation because they've been taught to think (and before we get into a debate about Oxbridge elites and 1%ers etc. someone with an Oxbridge degree is better-educated than someone from former-poly-university of West Cumbria on Sea)

Does that mean there aren't pointless degrees? No, it doesn't, but the idea that all degrees should have some kind of practical purpose is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

In fact, I'd actually turn it around; if "industry" wants specific, practical degrees from students, why doesn't it fucking pay for them? Give specific bursaries for engineering or science or commercial subjects as a percentage of their HR budgets. Big industry is always moaning about students not having relevant skills, well they're the ones who can fix the problem. It happens at post-grad level to an extent, but why not for undergrads too?

 

[Gwadien]

Raven, at the minute universitiea, even the shitty one I go to currently picks out the best students to do masters and PhDs, so they can contribute to that subject (infacf NTU is a major contributor to history and bio medicine Crusades and Anthony Nolan)

They approach loads of students who do well, but in the future I can see that number sharply declining and picking like the top 2 because the top 20 (out of 300 or so) could potentially leave, get amazing jobs and pay off the huge debt that the university now has.

But Yeah, I do agree they have to get rid of the useless courses, but its unfair on people who don't go to university because it's good source of free money to spunk to spunk.

I agree with Gaffer, at 17/8 you should be able to approach an Employer and say look, I want to work for you but I need this degree, give me a loan/bursary, and I'll come work for you once I'm done.

Infact, my dad has a guy working for him who did that, but the point stands, it should be universal, student finance (maybe?) should bring it upon theirselves to en mass ask employers if they're interested in such a scheme.

 

[Raven]

Three things:

1) Who are you to decide what value something is? Or is "value" something that can only be derived based on what industry says is valuable to it's very narrow interests?

What possible use is a degree in (to pick a few from http://www.hellou.co.uk/2014/03/2014s-top-20-degrees-likely-leave-jobseekers-3313/2/) Sports science, film studies, sociology...what real critical thought or process happens within studying that shit?

2) Students now pay their own fees. Yet all society benefits from their larglely self-funded higher educational attainment. Surely if they find interest in something and fund themselves (getting themselves into a high level of debt to follow that interest) they deserve support, not derision

Paid at an extremely low rate and mostly written off anyway, it is not even counted as real debt by banks, don't insult yourself by believing it is real debt.

3) You've been to Uni, right. So you're speaking from a position of authority and experience about what value the multiplicity of stupid-sounding courses (anthropology, funerary archaeology, peace studies) hold, right?

Or are you just quoting the opinions of tabloid newspapers or the uneducated "man down the pub"...?

No, but I see loads of graduates swimming about at the bottom of the employment ladder with absolutely no idea what they are doing, they skitter about going sideways from low paid job to low paid job. We have loads in our customer service department. And for the record, I will leave obtaining my opinion from the Guardian and the rest of the gutter press to you, thanks

 

[Scouse]

if "industry" wants specific, practical degrees from students, why doesn't it fucking pay for them?

This.

 

[Raven]

I agree with Gaffer, at 17/8 you should be able to approach an Employer and say look, I want to work for you but I need this degree, give me a loan/bursary, and I'll come work for you once I'm done.

That's fine, and would be great. But again, what employer wants someone with a shit degree from a shit university in a subject that has zero relevance to anything whatsoever and have to pay for it. The short answer is none.

They can get someone with a relevant or useful degree that does show the candidate has a brain for free.

Also, do people really want private industry messing with education?

 

[Toikodes]

Also, do people really want private industry messing with education?

What you're proposing is basically the same thing, but mediated by government and public funding. If the end goal of education is employment, the end goal is dictated by private industry.

 

[DaGaffer]

I agree with Gaffer, at 17/8 you should be able to approach an Employer and say look, I want to work for you but I need this degree, give me a loan/bursary, and I'll come work for you once I'm done.

That's always been sort of possible (I had a mate at Uni who was sponsored by an employer that way at undergrad level), although quite rare, but I'd take it further; why doesn't say, BAE, or Rolls-Royce, sponsor a whole engineering course? The student doesn't have to go through the hoops of looking for a sponsor in the middle of their A-Levels, and they get subsidised tuition fees etc. if they choose that course. Especially relevant for engineering, where what usually happens is courses accept lower points just to get bums on seats (which inevitably leads to a high drop out rate). Hell, the sponsor doesn't even have to take those students on, just incentivise the pick of the litter to get their placement year (say, only 2i and above get a shot) and then filter them for the actual jobs at the end. I bet it wouldn't even be that expensive (probably cheaper than the milk round), and if someone in Government was capable of joined up thinking they might even come up with incentives for companies to do it (tax breaks on volume for instance; the more courses at the more unis you sponsor, the bigger the break). The whole thing incentivises students to pick "useful" courses, helps the skills gap, is good for society at large, and probably wouldn't be that expensive.

 

[DaGaffer]

They can get someone with a relevant or useful degree that does show the candidate has a brain for free.

Except they can't. The problem isn't just people doing useless degrees, its also not enough people doing "useful" ones in certain areas, particularly science and engineering.

Also, do people really want private industry messing with education?

You can't have it both ways; piss and moan about crap subjects from the sidelines, or take a stake in the process. Which is better?

 

[Job]

Have you seen the Google rockhopper advert...thats the future..its baby steps now but it is unstoppable...in 50 years all knowledge will be instantly available and education will simply be how to spot bullshit..which of course you can do online..Im not talking facts..but also critical thinking..life experience..all there...thats not science fiction..it is our very near future...universities..teaching..all gone in 50 years.

 

[Raven]

You can't have it both ways; piss and moan about crap subjects from the sidelines, or take a stake in the process. Which is better?

...but that is what this legislation proposes to do...so er yeah.

Make universities provide more useful degrees that will earn decent employment meaning the loans actually get paid off.

Regardless of @Scouse's frankly baffling world view if someone, government, business or whoever is paying for a person to study for 3 years then they ought to see a return.

Nobody wants to spend 12k (or more) to educate someone to the standard of a critically thinking shelf stacker, do they?

 

[Ormorof]

I find it funny you included sports science on the list of crap subjects as I know a lot of people who did that at uni and are now struggling for employment in their field in the UK, despite the fact they have to go through shitloads of maths, physics, chemistry and biology (but hey that doesnt require critical thinking right? ) seeing as its often done as a BSc at uni level

I think its a bit wrong in general to blame graduates for being without job skills, yes it takes personal effort but many of the people I went to school with were extremely dissapointed at how poor the quality of education was at undergraduate level considering they were paying thousands per year for it

I on the other hand am studying for free (and getting paid to study infact) in the good ol nordics

 

[Job]

Youre all referring to now..in 20 years it will all look like vhs....unis will hang on because a huge amount of their position is elitism..snobbery and class..people are seen to 'better' themselves through education..well all that will disappear..its happening as we speak..knowledge is becoming as cheap as chips and you prattle on about a system with no future.

 

[Ormorof]

Well in your bizaro no maths teaching class based UK future that might be the case, but access to high quality higher education is considered a cornerstone of equality and is a great social leveler.

Its one of the main arguments against tuition fees, even if it is not "real" debt it is still percieved aa debt and so doscourages people from lower incomes to apply, why not just give the money straight to the universities and force graduates to pay an extra 1-2% tax?

That way no one has to administrate all this bollox and the "not real" debt isnt at risk of being flogged to some random US/chinese/russian corporation/criminal

 

[DaGaffer]

...but that is what this legislation proposes to do...so er yeah.

Make universities provide more useful degrees that will earn decent employment meaning the loans actually get paid off.

Regardless of @Scouse's frankly baffling world view if someone, government, business or whoever is paying for a person to study for 3 years then they ought to see a return.

Nobody wants to spend 12k (or more) to educate someone to the standard of a critically thinking shelf stacker, do they?

That's not what this study is proposing to do at all; its a wheeze to offload a Treasury problem back to the Unis themselves, privatisation through the back door.

And once again you're oversimplifying; the key problem is the definition of "return" on the "investment" in students. First there's the argument that the parents of those students made the investment in their education over the previous 18 years, so its not the government's money and not their duty to expect a return (and just to be clear, its never "the government's" money, its our money).

Second, you've thrown several subjects out as "useless" such as Sociology; now, while a sociology degree was a running joke even back when I was at Uni in the late Cretaceous, it doesn't mean we don't need sociologists, and social workers etc. etc. I wouldn't want to do it, but even the likes of HR departments will take people with Sociology degrees. Are there too many? Probably, but that's a supply and demand problem, not a debate on the subject's worth (and as I said earlier there are tons of "useless" subjects that are anything but, with the caveat that its often the quality of the University itself, rather than the subject, that determines its worth).

Third, you're making the mistake of assuming the Government gives a fuck about the number of students doing useless degrees, when in reality it suits their short-termist agenda just fine; several hundred thousand people out of the unemployment figures, broadly fending for themselves for 3-4 years. If they weren't at Uni, what would they be doing? Shelf-stacking or working as CS drones, which is what they'll end up doing anyway, but with the government using the number of graduates in the workforce as a PR message.

Finally, if you're stupid enough to do media studies and think you're going to become Steven Spielberg, you've got no-one to blame but yourself. Students are choosing to do dumbass courses at dumbass universities, its not like the information on their future employment prospects isn't easily accessible.

 

[Gumbo]

You seem to have forgotten about Research and the value that adds - Where would we be without thinkers and researchers like Richard Feynman?. The end goal of 'University' is not just employment - never has and never will be. I don't disagree that there are some hideous degrees out there but we have vocational education for a reason.

Just skimming this thread, at my job, without a degree behind me, but stealing a cup of tea and a quick look at freddies....

Researcher, at a University is a job. Your post makes no sense leggy. Someone is paying for the researcher, and the researcher will have earned their employment as a researcher through their undergrad work at the least. My sister has been at the same University for 23 years now, and she's been an employee there for 19 of them.

Gaffer, companies like Rolls Royce do sponsor studying. There's very few given out, but you can fight for them. The RAF doing flying scholarships too, there are possibilities out there, but I agree not many. Whether that's a bad thing though...?

 

[DaGaffer]

Gaffer, companies like Rolls Royce do sponsor studying. There's very few given out, but you can fight for them. The RAF doing flying scholarships too, there are possibilities out there, but I agree not many. Whether that's a bad thing though...?

I know sponsorships are available, but that's taking a punt on specific individuals at age 18 (and let's be honest, even academically gifted 18 year olds are still...18, not the finished article), when it would be better, for employers and the wider job market, to broaden the net by doing it a course level.

 

[Job]

Universities have long been centres of research and scientific excellent but also entrenched thinking..the private sector is flying past them on every possible discipline except maybe theoretical stuff..which is all there will be left..mans enormous advantage over the machine..our ability to dream and without it nothing would go forward..that is what we wil do..simply point the machine at the clouds.

 

[Gwadien]

Universities have long been centres of research and scientific excellent but also entrenched thinking..the private sector is flying past them on every possible discipline except maybe theoretical stuff..which is all there will be left..mans enormous advantage over the machine..our ability to dream and without it nothing would go forward..that is what we wil do..simply point the machine at the clouds.

No they're not, Universities are still central to research.

I think the problem lays with College, at College, you're told to go to University if it costs you your life, but you're not told what to do at the end of it, so people are like YAY AT UNI! (doing harry potter studies)

There needs to be employer involvement early on in schools and Colleges, apart from the fucking Army.

Also, there's global market for employers now, most kids who go down routes because there's a shortage of workers in them (Engineering for instance, which my Dad does) and there's kids thinking they can start on £40k a year straight away, because there's a shortage of engineers.

Nope, not when there's engineers flying in from abroad with doctorates begging to work for next to nothing.

 

[Madmaxx]

I find it funny when students can't get a job because of a lack of relevant work experience or any experience at all, why not take a sandwich course and get a year in the industry; and if the uni you were interested doesn't offer one go to a different one surely.

 

[Gwadien]

I find it funny when students can't get a job because of a lack of relevant work experience or any experience at all, why not take a sandwich course and get a year in the industry; and if the uni you were interested doesn't offer one go to a different one surely.

I think that's mainly down to most students don't think about work until they've finished Uni, I think a majority of students who aren't in the top 10 or so universities try and avoid reality.

 

[Gumbo]

That's why people like Rolls Royce will sponsor a few students rather than fund courses at random. It's very very hard to get the sponsorship. You have to impress them with your existing work, you have to attend assessments and interviews, you have to be a highly motivated individual. Not someone who stumbles into an engineering degree with no real idea of what they want to do. I do feel that there is an argument that Uni should be more about learning and getting qualified to do stuff, than simply 'finding yourself'. Go backpacking for that bollocks.