Your thoughts on university

notanewuser

claire21 wrote: »

Reading back re grades
1 / 2.1 / 2.2 / 3

Is a 3 still good? Is a 3 the lowest it goes before a fail?

A 3 isn't worth having.

TheEffect

claire21 wrote: »

Reading back re grades
1 / 2.1 / 2.2 / 3

Is a 3 still good? Is a 3 the lowest it goes before a fail?

I believe the grading goes as following:

1st = 70%+
2:1 = 60%-70%
2:2 = 50%-60%
3rd = 40%-50%
Fail = <40%

As far as I'm aware, a 3rd is not great, and is unlikely to get you onto a masters, or teachers training, but is still a degree.

notanewuser

Woolwich_Kim wrote: »

I'm 30 and have loads of work experience which is more worthy than qualifications as you can't buy years of experience. My friends who did go, are still paying off student loans and starting at the bottom as without experience they are unlikely to be in a position to demand a good starting salary. I'm also at a point in life where I'm realistically able to be a first time buyer and already own a car, have no debts and never brought anyting on finance/higher purchase.

.

I'm 36 and bought my first car at 17 and first house at 19.

My sister is 33 and bought her first flat (London) at 23. 5 years ago she bought an amazing penthouse flat in Chelsea!

CH27

I didn't go to uni.
My son is in his 1st year at a Russell Group uni & the difference in him is vast.
He's grown up, he can budget, cook, clean, wash, iron & most importantly it's broadened his horizons.
He's met such a variety of people from all over the world & tried things he would never, ever have got the chance to do at home.
He's learned to manage his time & to motivate himself.

He's also made lots of friends, one or two of whom I suspect will be in his life forever.

angelil

I definitely think it's not as "special" now. Now that it's got so much more expensive, too, I would definitely be thinking twice before going myself (or sending my child). I would really want to be absolutely sure of going for the right reasons, and not just because everyone else was going, or because they didn't know what else to do, or "for the experience" (that's a pretty f*****g expensive experience there!). I would want to be fairly optimistic that the degree was needed for the job they wanted to do, or that said degree would lead to a good job (chances are, for example, that a computer science degree would lead to a "better" job that makes the cost of the degree worth it, as opposed to, say, an art history degree. Don't think I'm bashing the arts - I speak as an arts graduate myself!).

For these reasons, I would fully support an enforced gap year for many young people (unless they want to study maths or medicine, as many universities actively condemn this in case it takes the edge off students' current mathematical knowledge and makes it more difficult for them to cope in year 1 of their course). I think schools act too much like conveyor belts now and are too keen to funnel students indiscriminately into universities - this was already the case in 2007, when my sister was leaving school (a bog standard state comp, FWIW), and is certainly the case in the school where I work as a teacher now (not that I approve of this, as you can probably tell!).

OP, the main thing is to make sure it is right for your children and that they are doing it for the right reasons - which I think you will.

KiKi

claire21 wrote: »

Reading back re grades
1 / 2.1 / 2.2 / 3

Is a 3 still good? Is a 3 the lowest it goes before a fail?

No, a 'pass' is the lowest. It's a first, a two one (meaning an upper second class degree), a two two (meaning a lower second class degree), a third, then a pass.

To get onto a graduate scheme, or be considered 'competitive' (again, depends on the job and industry, so this is a generalisation) you want a first, or a two one. A two two wouldn't get you onto most graduate or management programmes after uni, and if you needed a specific degree for a specific job, you can forget it with a third. A third or a pass isn't considered 'good' by employers, if they are asking for a degree.

OU degrees require a higher percentage pass mark for those grades as well. So where a brick uni needs 70% for a first, the OU requires 85%.

(The term 'first degree' can mean two things, BTW! It can mean the first degree you did (ie, an undergraduate degree that gets you a BA Hons or a BSc etc) - some people who are on Masters level degrees refer to their undergraduate degree as their 'first degree'. Or it could refer to a first class degree. Which could be any sort of degree - an undergraduate or a postgraduate etc where the person got a first class honours.)

HTH

zagubov

thorsoak wrote: »

Re

I would be happier to see the sort of vocational training that appears to have gone out of fashion now - my OH entered engineering as a trainee engineer (not an apprentice), had part-time day release + 1 evening at night school to get his ONC in mech engineering, then part time day release + 2 evenings for HNC, then 1 year full term time (working during vacations) for his HND -so he was doing practical work with placements and getting some pay - a bit more than an apprentice would with a bit more responsibility. However, with the decline in engineering in the 1970s, this method of training went out the window.

I started my career as a college lecturer teaching hospital lab technicians on day release ONC and HNC courses. That's really delcined now. At an education confefrence back in the mid-90s we were told the government was trying to promote full-time HE as a "good" so that a huge chunk of the population would get themselves off to uni ( and the uni sector would have to expand to meet these needs (which it has)). The idea is an employer doesn't have to take the risk of training an employee on day-release when they might move on elsewhere and take their skills improved at their employer's expense.

Instead we'd take out loans and pay for our own education. Keeps us off the unemployment figures and gives employers cheap educated employees who work five or more days a week.

Pechow wrote: »

I'm almost finished with an OU degree now, Computing (and a second subject). I've enjoyed it but really wonder how much it will help or not with getting a job afterwards. Are OU degrees seen as good things?

Before I started my OU course, I did one year at an actual physical university. The subject was close to my heart and I enjoyed that, but otherwise it was a terrible experience. It seemed like university was just what you were meant to do-I don't remember ever really being told in school about alternatives. Uni is really pushed on you, but it really isn't for everyone, and not having a degree doesn't mean you're doomed to working in McDonalds forever-and I really wish they'd mentioned that and talked about other options, and that they were okay to pick too.

Yes they are (and not just because I worked for the OU once). It's regarded as a very credible way of learning. I was most impressed and employers are as well, at least partly because of the drive and self-organisation it reveals about the student taking it.

IMHO the government should have expanded the OU immensely to accept new students instead of making the polys into universities.

claire21

Quote :Sort of - take 2 universities, they will have average entry tariffs for the same sort of degree eg History somewhere like Exeter / Durham / oxbridge/ St Andrews has an entry Tariff of over 500 (this is calculated from A levels / IB etc etc ) where an A* A level is 140 points.
Then look at somewhere local to me like Leeds Met where the Tariff is 236.


Quoted from back a bit

How do you get 500 points if you do 3 A levels , or is it that you can't so the people going there have 4 A levels?

busiscoming2

My opinion:

My experience was the same as your original post OP.
My elder two went to Uni as did most of their school friends. Most aren't working in the field of their degree. Most could have got their respective jobs without their degrees. It also seems anything less than a 2:1 or 1st isn't worth having.
Positively it taught them independence, how to manage their finances and generally improved their self confidence.

I think considering the debt any given person is left with if they aren't going into a profession where a degree is vital it is a bit pointless.

Tropez

zagubov wrote: »

Yes they are (and not just because I worked for the OU once). It's regarded as a very credible way of learning. I was most impressed and employers are as well, at least partly because of the drive and self-organisation it reveals about the student taking it.

IMHO the government should have expanded the OU immensely to accept new students instead of making the polys into universities.

I'd like to add my agreement with this. My degrees are OU (I'm studying for another one at the moment) and it has helped my career massively.

As someone in a management position, it is true that employers generally regard OU degrees very highly as they are seen as a clear indication that someone wished to improve themselves academically and committed to what can be quite a difficult educational process because of the amount of personal drive, determination and self sufficiency required to complete an OU degree.

I'd also say that I feel the government handled the OU poorly. I signed the OU petition to try and exclude the institution from the fees overhaul because it is my earnest belief that the OU is something this country should be proud of; an institution that gave many, many people a new lease on life and a chance for self improvement regardless of background and personal circumstance. It is still a fantastic institution and I will always gladly endorse them.