University degree not worth as much as touted

dopester

lostinrates wrote: »

I don't know what is in the curriculum for a sort science degree....at the top end it could certainly be degree level science. The issue is, are their jobs for all the grads, and does it add value to the country to support all undergrads reading the subject. I simply don't know the answer to those questions I pose!

I suspect the jobs are there, but with deflation and falling velocity of money, the current expectations as to the levels of pay these jobs will be paying into the future are going to have to be revised. Downwards. By a long way.

Since 1997, the credit-expansion boom has added a lot of fuel to this economy, widely redistributing wealth, and even creating many jobs which just wouldn't have come into existence without the credit boom / HPI.

The credit expansion provided a flow of well paid jobs and money to those who otherwise would have not had it under a more balanced system. So I'm wary people applying recent past experiences for jobs and pay to the future. It's deflating... mechanics' wages, plumbers'... they are all going to fall and fall. Fewer people can afford to pay current rates, and will find it tougher still going into the future.

The opportunities and income for unskilled or semi-skilled workers is going to seriously fall. It is also going to get much tougher for opportunities and pay for even the smart and well qualified.

The bar is forever being raised as to what you need to bring to earn good money in the private sector. The higher paying jobs will increasingly go towards those who are the most capable best in their fields, who can bring extra value and advantage to an employer. Fewer people will be able to high-jump over the ever rising bar... unless you have ever superior skill-sets.

It is slightly depressing because not all of us can expect to be exceptionally talented in our field, or near geniuses.. which is the way it is going if you want to earn good money.

There is a guy on another forum whining about how companies are only offering £8 ph for IT vacancies where they seek quite highly qualified IT people. There is a glut of mid-range IT people to select from. If you don't want the £8ph, don't apply. Take another higher paying job... if you can land one. Or set up for yourself and see if you want to offer someone else more than the market rate for a similar position, when to do so would put too much drain on your business.

StevieJ

dopester wrote: »

There is a guy on another forum whining about how companies are only offering £8 ph for IT vacancies where they seek quite highly qualified IT people. There is a glut of mid-range IT people to select from. If you don't want the £8ph, don't apply. Take another higher paying job... if you can land one. Or set up for yourself and see if you want to offer someone else more than the market rate for a similar position, when to do so would put too much drain on your business.

Then again I know of an IT guy, who has not worked for three years just been offered a job for £2k a week.

lostinrates

Kohoutek wrote: »

That's the problem with Oxbridge I'm afraid. There are plenty of other excellent universities without such a quirky admissions system. It's not the end of the world to be non-Oxbridge, even for a budding academic.



At my sixth form, the only way to apply was to make your own decision, and then fill out the UCAS form by yourself. The school didn't offer to do it for you. That's ample evidence of an enormous gap between the state and private sector in terms of university preparation.



Sure, I think most parents would send their children to the private sector if they could afford it, but the children of rich people aren't necessarily the most intelligent people. The problems with the state system distort our universities and job market to make it look like privately educated children are the most intelligent and able, but although many are intelligent, in general they are just the best prepared.

Who has ever argued that private children are universally more intelligent? Nobody I know. There are many differences, none universal, to do with socioeconomic factors, the expectations of average groups of parents/schools, and children themselves, and most importantly he aims of children across the whole of society as success (this is usually where the discussion about ambition to be ''famous'' starts).but what I conclude from your analysis and really's experience (accepting neither are meant to offer comprehensive analysis)would be that the state sector is failing its students, not that the private sector is cheating the state...

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

I may have attained more academically if i was aloud to develop at the speed I wanted/needed. One of the reasons I stopped A levels as I really did not find them any more in depth than GCSE's and felt it was just going over stuff I knew to keep others going.
But I left with 9 GCSE's C and above what 15-16 years ago.:o

I really do not feel education has ever held back my earning potential if you know things you know them.
The problem is with the piece of paper it tells people you did something not that you retained the info

Part of my fast learning it to do with the problem I have, the worrying thing for me I now see it in my son. (He has from the age of 2 been able to recite story's word for word which I have read to him. He is currently in pre school at just over 2.5 just so he can get the stimulation he needs)

I must admit I will encorage my son as at least I have experience, but it is a bit of a worry.

My favorite school ditty was in chemistry and my report said "His exam results will show the little effort he put in", that would be the highest grade in the class then.

Really, I like that post very much.

I think I meant, as a person though, in life....rather than pay packet....you obviously had as a child (and now ) a lot of intellectual curiosity. I think to not encourage children to ask ''why'' or ''how'' is a shame...if you don't have time or answers then encourage them to find out them selves.....to just tell them o hush is potentially stunting. I'm glad you feel this has not been the result for you. Your son is lucky to have a dad looking out for his interests. FWIW both my nieces and most kids I've read to remembered stories quickly too, especially if well read/told, ..so it might not be over indicative but good to have a heads up....:)

MissMoneypenny

Kohoutek wrote: »

To argue that a private education is a hindrance to getting to a top university is ludicrous, it's patently the opposite. The state system fails an incalculable number of bright people by preventing them achieve their potential, the private school system gives you a massive step up in terms of smaller classes, better teachers, better materials, more focused learning, better preparation for university interviews. Otherwise what's the point in paying all that money?

Don't think that by getting a child to Oxbridge that they are guaranteed a good job. I know an estate agent that went to private school and then did a BA at Cambridge. Yes, I know it is only a BA and not a BSc, but he graduated from Oxbridge.

In the early 90s, universities started to realise that good grades at a state school was often worth more than a good grades from private (spoon fed) schools and the papers were full of stories about this. My aunt teaches in a private school and over the years she has seen a loss in traditional type families (doctors and lawyers) sending their children to private schools and seen more children with family backgrounds in retail, farming, office worker and lorry driver type jobs.

We had a very good local comprehensive near us and my children were in the top sets at that school with lawyers and doctors children. Both my children were high rate tax payers in their early 20s with my son coming straight out of university to a 44k job. Without their degrees, my two would not be earning this sort of money at a young age.

olly300

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

In the early 90s, universities started to realise that good grades at a state school was often worth more than a good grades from private (spoon fed) schools and the papers were full of stories about this.

I found when I went to college that half the class had previously come from private and public schools. There parents were simply playing the system as quite a few of them had private tuition as well.

However due to the media perception and the knowledge of bad comprehensives one, reason why people send their kids to private school is that they want their average ability child to learn in a class where they are not disrupted.

If you are in the tops sets at a comprehensive school, unless the school is a real sink school then your learning don't have to put up with this problem at all. Mainly because your peers want to learn regardless of background.

olly300

Kohoutek wrote: »

At my sixth form, the only way to apply was to make your own decision, and then fill out the UCAS form by yourself. The school didn't offer to do it for you. That's ample evidence of an enormous gap between the state and private sector in terms of university preparation.

The state school I left and the college I went to, both helped to prepare pupils for Oxbridge as they used it as advertising tool to get the middle class parents they wanted into their respective institutions.

I don't know whether it worked or not as all the people I know who were extremely intelligent regardless of backgrond decided they would rather go elsewhere.

fc123

Kohoutek wrote: »

Intelligence or suitability for university is virtually irrelevant in our current system, it depends almost entirely on social background and wealth.

That's not 100% true.

StevieJ

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

We had a very good local comprehensive near us and my children were in the top sets at that school with lawyers and doctors children. Both my children were high rate tax payers in their early 20s with my son coming straight out of university to a 44k job. Without their degrees, my two would not be earning this sort of money at a young age.

Did she do media studies

fc123

Really2 wrote: »

I posted this yesterday.


I was told to stop answering questions at primary school to give other children the chance.:( (amazing how things stick in your mind at that age)

If that happens with my son I will send him private.
State schools drag down the best to drag up the worst. (well they did in my day)
Teacher usually fail to spot why some sit there or are can be disruptive, in a few it is because the child has done what they have asked and understands and is waiting for everyone else. But are usually put down as uninterested.

I lost count the amount of times I was told I was cheating when completing 2.5H exams in just over 30 mins.
Not a great encouragement I must admit.

This was our experience some years back with our son. We have been 'poor' ever since as paying for schools is pricey......guttingly so when there are great free ones around....you just have to be able to afford to live in the catchment.....a bit catch 22.
It's something that has p***ed me off for years.