Is a University degree worth it?

FBaby

stinktankcynic wrote: »

A degree 20 years ago, not so many people went to uni, but if you had a decent degree and experience then you probably got the chance of a better job. Now nearly everyone has a degree or qualification but they have paid, borrowed and got into debt for it. In my mind, unless your very talented, rich or focused on a career, paying huge fees, losing three years wages etc to get a degree which guarantees nothing is a big gamble. If you have contacts, use them, try and get an apprenticeship with training and prospects after school. Some do really well doing this.

I agree with your post, but at the same time, you could argue that because so many people now have a degree, if you don't, you are going to lose out as it might become a minimum requirement for most jobs.

The reality is that the importance of choosing to go to Uni or not is going to be very much dependent on the economy after that time. In the 90s, it wasn't so important to have a degree for many jobs and if you could use the opportunity to work and get on the property ladder then, you have probably done well. For those coming into the job market now, I would think you would struggle without a degree, but at the same time, those with a solid degree in a specific field will do much better than those having studied soft subject. Who knows what it will be in 10 years time. The only pretty safe decision is to study for a trade.

kloana

For me, going to uni was about much more than job prospects, and I knew that at the time when I applied.

I got excellent GCSE and A-Level results. I applied for 6 universities (it's different now, I think you get 5 choices) - 2 top 30 institutions, 2 middle-ranking, and 2 'low' ones. I applied to the top ones in case I suddenly had a change of heart and decided I did want to be super academic. I chose the bottom two as 'insurance'. I received offers from all 6, and eventually got the A-Level grades required for any of the above.

I attended one of the middle-ranking universities, as this was where I wanted to go anyway. It took me to the city I wanted to live in, and immersed me in the social scene I was interested in (yeah, social scene - no shame in my game).

I did an 'ology' degree, which I was genuinely interested in. I knew full well that I wouldn't walk into a super job immediately, and had no such illusions. I didn't want to be a doctor, lawyer, astrophysicist, so didn't apply for such courses. Assuming I'd even get on any of these courses (I'm better with arts and humanities subjects), I think they would've bored me to tears.

I studied reasonably hard, but I socialised even harder. By which I don't mean I was reckless (I wasn't!), but I had the best 3 years of my life, and met lots of people from the four corners of the globe. I finished uni 7 years ago, but it still has a lasting impression on me.

Immediately out of uni, I firstly considered graduate schemes. I still had no idea what I wanted to do for a living, but prospects were a little better then, pre-financial crisis – it seemed back then that the bare level of eligibility for a lot of schemes was a 2.1 in any subject (or a 2.2 in the case of quite a few). So with my 2.1 ‘ology’, I was hot to trot.

I applied for lots. I flunked/abandoned quite a few applications, but I was offered one in HR with a computer company (!), and one in 'management' with the NHS. But in my heart of hearts, I knew neither was exactly what I wanted.

Needing a job, but not ready for the corporate rat race, I took a part-time job in a shop…which turned into a full-time management position within 3 years. I left that to explore a career I hadn't even previously considered – working for a bank. I absolutely hated it, but the experience was invaluable, and helped me land my current role, which is in a different (and much more enjoyable) area of financial services.

So, uni did little for me job-wise, but did a lot for me personally. Although the subject I studied didn't directly prepare me for a specific job (few did), a lot of the assignments helped me develop organisational skills, presentation skills, writing skills, and so on, at a reasonably high level.

Even as an ‘ology’ graduate, my degree could've done a lot more for me, if I’d had more focus and drive (oh, and a clue as to what I wanted to work as!), but there’s no way I was ready for a ‘career’ of any type at age 21.

My career has only developed through actual work experience, and in learning on the job, and working my way up. I have a slightly lower salary than I’d expect most late-20s graduates do, but wouldn't trade my current career for any money, and wouldn't be lured elsewhere purely for cash anyway.

(I still would've gone to uni, even in hindsight, and wouldn't change my course/choice of uni).

inmypocketnottheirs

TopQuark wrote: »

The value of a good education is immense and countries with educated populations tend to better places to live for everyone (a case for why tertiary education should be tax-payer/state funded).

An exception to that statement would be India. A country that has one of the highest numbers of university graduates per head of the population. Education certainly isn't tax payer or state funded there. Moreover, it is valued as a way o a better job. Exactly as it should be here.

System

Yes, if its a degree in something like medicine, pharmacy, accounting. A degree in social science, better putting your money down a drain

Person_one

berbastrike wrote: »

Yes, if its a degree in something like medicine, pharmacy, accounting. A degree in social science, better putting your money down a drain

Tell that to my good friend who was head of department at a well performing school before the age of 30, not all that long after graduating with a first in sociology...

Daedalus

Person_one wrote: »

Tell that to my good friend who was head of department at a well performing school before the age of 30, not all that long after graduating with a first in sociology...

Degree subject is rather redundant in most people's working lives. It comes down to the individual. Someone with a 2.2 can excel in business whilst one with a first will be mediocre. Degrees open the door, the individual gets the job.

Dunroamin

Jobseeeker wrote: »

I would say if its for something vocational eg she wants to be a physiotherapist so studies physiotherapy or she wants to be a teacher so does teacher training then yes!

however if its say, english/maths etc id probably say no. Im in touch with all my friends from uni and most who did the latter arent doing well

Of course, if you want to be an English or a Maths teacher, having an English or Maths degree is pretty essential.;)

olly300

I also work in IT and have worked abroad.

What I discovered is that in many EEA countries they can only accept you for certain skilled roles if you have very little or no practical experience if you have a degree.

Only if you have no practical experience does the degree have to be related to the job otherwise any degree will do.

If you don't have a degree then they either will not accept you at all, or you need to have many more years of practical experience.

In some UK companies they will not promote people without degrees to managerial or senior positions. This means some of my friends' and other people I know have been turned down.

However I know from some other people that this "degree" they want can be a postgraduate degree i.e. Masters which consolidates academically the years of practical experience you have in an area.

Person_one

Daedalus wrote: »

Degree subject is rather redundant in most people's working lives. It comes down to the individual. Someone with a 2.2 can excel in business whilst one with a first will be mediocre. Degrees open the door, the individual gets the job.

Not everybody works or wants to work in 'business'.

Brassedoff

As an employer and person who sources new staff for projects, I find some degrees worthless. When I did my degree, anything less than a 2.1 was not even considered anything worth shouting about. Yet now you see 2.2, thirds or even passes being heralded as "having earned" the qualification.

Secondly, the costs. It's both eye watering and frightening.

I work with several client companies that have turned the clock back several decades in order to secure the staff they want. My son benefits from this scheme in Motorsport engineering. This is what I will describe as scheme two, you have two routes, the choices are out there.

First a youngster either stays on, gets their 'A' levels or go to college and gets the HND. They go to University at 18/19 spend four years there, leaving at the age of 23/24 with a "degree" and £45-50K of debt. Plus no more experience than that of a 16 year old.

The second route and employers who look for the higher nett worth degrees are putting their own future staff through this route to ensure the company's longevity. They manage to retain the staff way past the learning process too. These companies take on promising 16 year olds, teach them over the first four years the process of employment, getting up in the morning, interacting with adults and learning the job. They then go to University for a day a week at 18 for 6 years, all funded by the employer and while the young person receives a weeks pay.

They leave university aged 24 with a degree and a full eight years of gold plated experience.


I will leave you to decide which route is best, but interviewing one of each, I know who I would most likely to pick.

So in summary, yes, the right type of degree is worth going for, but they type of apprenticeship and degree process offered by the Sandvic type company's are worth their weight in gold.