Are degrees in the UK value for money?

Cakeguts

Arklight wrote: »

We charge more than the US. If you don't mind doing an associate degree in a community college followed by paying in state fees at the closest state university to you, you can get a 4 year degree for $10,000. There is no equivalent affordable option for kids in the UK.


The general attitude towards education on this thread is very depressing, and explains why successive Tory governments seem to detest education so much.

That is because all the community colleges that used to be called technical colleges in the UK have been allowed to change their names to universities and charge their students. The community college in the US offers an education level that is about the same as a 6th form college in the UK. To get a university education you have to do a 4 year course. Some students go to community college and then university for 4 year course and some students do the 4 year course straight after high school. Everyone knows that some universities are much harder to get into than others and that high flyers in all jobs do better if they get into one of the top universities. So everyone is trying to get into "a good school." It is common knowledge that you need to go to a top level university to get a degree that offers more options.

The problem in the UK is that a fair number of students think that all universities offer the same level of education and no one is prepared to tell them the truth that they don't. Too many vested interests.

Pennywise

Cakeguts wrote: »

The problem in the UK is that a fair number of students think that all universities offer the same level of education and no one is prepared to tell them the truth that they don't. Too many vested interests.

Also that students think that different subjects are the same and expect a decent job from "any" degree instead of looking at the future career options arising from the different degrees available. There seem to be far too many people taking a degree just because it's something they're interested in, without actually understanding that career prospects are limited.

zagubov

Arklight wrote: »

The general attitude towards education on this thread is very depressing, and explains why successive Tory governments seem to detest education so much.

The Tories went to private schools and elite universities. Instead of spreading opportunity to the rest of us they’ve treated education here to neglect and disdain. Not so long ago, we spent more money on research into glue than into education.

Cakeguts wrote: »

That is because all the community colleges that used to be called technical colleges in the UK have been allowed to change their names to universities and charge their students. The community college in the US offers an education level that is about the same as a 6th form college in the UK. To get a university education you have to do a 4 year course. Some students go to community college and then university for 4 year course and some students do the 4 year course straight after high school. Everyone knows that some universities are much harder to get into than others and that high flyers in all jobs do better if they get into one of the top universities. So everyone is trying to get into "a good school." It is common knowledge that you need to go to a top level university to get a degree that offers more options.

Our A levels are equivalent to the freshman and maybe half of the sophomore year in the US degree system. So English sixth form students are only about half a year short of the Associate degree that many people in the US complete before studying a further two years for a Batchelors.

Cakeguts wrote: »

The problem in the UK is that a fair number of students think that all universities offer the same level of education and no one is prepared to tell them the truth that they don't. Too many vested interests.

Not so long ago we had much more level playing field where we knew what a university degree was worth. The issuing university barely mattered. In the US the first thing they ask after mentioning their degree subject is “where did they study?” There are half a dozen degree-accrediting agencies there covering thousands of degree awarding institutions.

Cakeguts

Pennywise wrote: »

Also that students think that different subjects are the same and expect a decent job from "any" degree instead of looking at the future career options arising from the different degrees available. There seem to be far too many people taking a degree just because it's something they're interested in, without actually understanding that career prospects are limited.

The problem is that because of the vested interests the students who come from less well educated backgrounds can't get decent careers advice about what sort of career they can get after university. They can't get it from the universities who say things like 95% of our graduates are in work or further study after 6 months. That could mean wait 5 1/2 months and then get a job cleaning tables in the local cafe. Who is going to want to train a 21 year old with no usuable qualifications when they can get an 18 year old?

They can't get it from school because if you don't go to university you are regarded as a failure.

Sadly they can't get it from some adults who refuse to admit that not all universities are the same level of education.

Where are they going to get this information from? Too many vested interests in not telling the truth about university education in the UK. It isn't fair on the students. They can't make a decision about whether to go to university or not because they don't have all the facts.

Pennywise

Cakeguts wrote: »

Where are they going to get this information from?

They could spend a little time on their iphones and ipads and google for the information which is readily available to them. The current generation have free and easy access to a mass of information that previous generations could only dream about. Perhaps a few less hours on Facebook and a few more on career related websites would help.

economic

a video that is relevant to this discussion. certainly worth a watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BlJ_35ux1o

economic

Pennywise wrote: »

They could spend a little time on their iphones and ipads and google for the information which is readily available to them. The current generation have free and easy access to a mass of information that previous generations could only dream about. Perhaps a few less hours on Facebook and a few more on career related websites would help.

but 17-18 year olds are just kids. their parents are usually delusional. where will they get the initiative to look into their "career" decisions?

schools is probably the best place but of course they have other interests....

westernpromise

They also have to cope with Labour-voting teachers telling them they'll never get into Oxford or Cambridge. This is just a lie from inadequates who weren't good enough themselves, and who therefore need to believe they didn't get in because the system is rigged, rather than because they weren't good enough.

The biggest problem Oxbridge has with admitting applicants from state schools is getting them to apply in the first place.

SingleSue

Pennywise wrote: »

They could spend a little time on their iphones and ipads and google for the information which is readily available to them. The current generation have free and easy access to a mass of information that previous generations could only dream about. Perhaps a few less hours on Facebook and a few more on career related websites would help.

That's exactly what youngest did, he does have Facebook but he looks at it/posts on it so rarely he might as well not have it as it can be months between visits.

Mind you, he is not the normal run of the mill teenager, he doesn't drink, he doesn't smoke, he doesn't go to parties or social events, he just studies and does lots of research related things. His education is his paramount concern and as far as he is concerned, everything else can wait.

His nickname at college was the Prof as he had read so widely and researched things so much that the breadth of his knowledge was years in advance of his age and experience.

Arklight

Cakeguts wrote: »

That is because all the community colleges that used to be called technical colleges in the UK have been allowed to change their names to universities and charge their students. The community college in the US offers an education level that is about the same as a 6th form college in the UK. To get a university education you have to do a 4 year course. Some students go to community college and then university for 4 year course and some students do the 4 year course straight after high school. Everyone knows that some universities are much harder to get into than others and that high flyers in all jobs do better if they get into one of the top universities. So everyone is trying to get into "a good school." It is common knowledge that you need to go to a top level university to get a degree that offers more options.

The problem in the UK is that a fair number of students think that all universities offer the same level of education and no one is prepared to tell them the truth that they don't. Too many vested interests.

No, they aren't, and no they don't.


Community Colleges in America teach the equivalent of HNDs for 18+, as well as other technical and vocational adult ed subjects.


FE Colleges in the UK teach up to HND, and mostly cater to 14 - 19 year olds.


Polytechnics taught degree level courses which they designed and taught themselves, but which were accredited by Universities.


As the only difference was that the degrees were mandated at university senate rather than at the polytechnics' own senate, exams are externally moderated and programme delivery is accredited by the QAA, they were eventually given University status.