Why would you discourage a highly academic child from attending uni?

[WickedGoodDoge]

Just having a vent.

We went to the annual DH aunties Christmas get together where the mean aunties (with the exception of the one nice one) really excelled themselves this time. We had all sorts of judgements about our parenting, but actually, what stood out the most was this exchange between one particular aunt and DS:

Aunt: “Do you know what you want to do after you leave school?”
DS(16): “I’d like to study Maths at uni.”
Aunt: “Well, university isn’t for everyone. You could just get a job or an apprenticeship straight from school.”
DS: “I really like Maths and I’d quite like to study it.”
Aunt: “But university isn’t for everyone. There are other options. You should look at the other options. XX did an apprenticeship straight from school . University isn’t for everyone.”
Me: “No, he’s going to university.”
Aunt: “But university isn’t for everyone.”

It went on and on and on. I know there are other options. I fail to see why any would be better for DS, Fortunately DS saw the humour in it and spent much of the car ride home doubled over in laughter. I just get worn down by it and dread these get togethers.

For context, aunty and her DC are the only people in DH’s family (including DH) to have gone to university. She and the other aunties have been telling me that “university isn’t for everyone” since DS was 8. DS is a straight A student- we’re in Scotland where we sit Nat5s which I think are roughly equivalent to GCSE’s? He loves school, is highly academic, currently wants to become an actuary and does truly love Maths.

She’s a freaking secondary school teacher . WTF would she be so hellbent on discouraging DS?

Vent over.

I think the standard of teachers now in the profession is much higher.

Have to agree with that. When I was at school, I thought most of the teachers were pretty crap. Now my son is in the sixth form, from what he says and what I've seen of teachers at parent's evenings, markings, reports, etc., the older teachers are generally worse than the younger ones. Nearly all the younger ones (I mean around 40 and under) are far more enthusiastic, give far better pastoral care, etc. The few we've come across who are in their 60's are pretty abysmal - nearly all of the old school mentality and probably missing corporal punishment, and generally very lazy. My son's English has been ruined as he had the same 60+ English teacher for 4 out of the 5 years including the GCSE years - the teacher barely set any homework, and when he did, he rarely bothered marking it, and classes were just him reminiscing about the good old times rather than doing any actual teaching - clearly just waiting to retire. They had another 60+ teacher who was finally sacked after so many complaints against him due to violent outbursts in the classroom, such as throwing chairs around.

Badbadbunny, from the terminology you use, I'm guessing you're in England, where standards seem to be improving.
I was careful to emphasise I was only talking about where I live, but there is certainly concern in Scotland about lack of rigour and a decline in reading for example. That has an effect on secondary, obviously.
Only attracting the poorest graduates does nothing to improve things.

I’m afraid I’ve inadvertently derailed the thread with my comments about teacher training so I’ll clarify then say no more. I raised this because the OP’s aunt is a teacher from the 70s generation. That would have been my generation so I know what the entry requirements were at the time, and the type of girls who generally followed that path.

There was also, incidentally, a drive to get more mature teachers into the profession, for whom the entry requirements were just five ‘O’ levels. A lot of SAHMs, including my DM, were recruited that way.

I was careful to say that lower entry requirements didn’t mean that academic people didn’t go to TTC, just that the bar was lower in those days. There were some very good teachers in that generation and also some quite poor ones. Pre Ofsed there was a lot less rigour in weeding out the bad ones.

I mentioned this solely because the aunt may be presenting herself as more academic and knowledgable than she actually is.

Hope that clarifies, sorry OP for the detail.

Bugger, *derail. Autocorrect strikes again. 🤬

I don’t care if the thread is derailed. I’ve never had a thread go beyond a few posts so this is is like me making it to the top of Mount Everest.

"Hope that clarifies, sorry OP for the detail."

No, but you're talking about primary teachers and we've known for a long time that the aunt was a secondary teacher.

No, but you're talking about primary teachers and we've known for a long time that the aunt was a secondary teacher.

Which why it’s a derail

On topic again, I agree with other posters there are some very good routes into work for highly academic people which don’t include university. And university isn’t for everyone. But who is she to say that it isn’t for your DS? I wouldn’t let it worry you, he sounds like he will make up his own mind without her help.

I think some posters are forgetting that a degree might not matter at the beginning of the career, but it is very hard to progress to executive roles without one (it was possible 20 years ago but not anymore). It is much harder to commit to a degree when you have a family, steady job and a mortgage. I would definitely recommend getting it out of the way while DC has minimum responsibilities in life.

For those asking about what an actuary is / does this thread might be interesting.....

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/AMA/3419589-Im-an-actuary

The thing is some teenagers, given the option, are suited to working at 18 and others will benefit from university. Your DS certainly sounds like the latter.

DH is a part-qualified actuary, so I know that he for your DS to be considering it he must be GOOD.

I think women were not encouraged to think about alternatives to teaching. It was an obvious profession for intellectual women at the time.

I agree and your DM would be comparable to my late MiL. There was another factor she cited though - degrees leading to teaching did not command fees as there was a clear need for well qualified teachers (and there may even have been some form of grant).

Therefore it was pretty much the only university option for low income students and many women whose families would not pay for a woman to be educated.

I could vent about their obsession with the fact that he barely drinks

Aunty is well out of date on this one. Mine are all in their 20s and its striking to me how during their teens, uni years and now as young adults they drink a lot less than was common in my student years.

Cohort studies I've tracked down looking at this also support the notion that young people drink a lot less than their parents did at the same age.

Your DS is bang on trend.

I think some posters are forgetting that a degree might not matter at the beginning of the career, but it is very hard to progress to executive roles without one (it was possible 20 years ago but not anymore). It is much harder to commit to a degree when you have a family, steady job and a mortgage. I would definitely recommend getting it out of the way while DC has minimum responsibilities in life.

That’s one of DH’s big concerns. He really regrets not having a degree and thinks it has made his career progression that much harder. His current job role (senior role at one of the big consultancies) specifies a degree as a minimum requirement and an MBA as desirable. If he’d applied for it cold, it would have been a definite no before interview despite his experience. In contrast to Aunty, he’d recommend anyone keen and capable to go straight for the degree to avoid the challenges he’s come across by not having one in an industry where it is the norm.

I am reviving my own zombie thread.

It is that time of year again and the aunties annual Christmas party is on Saturday. DS isn’t looking forward to it and I’m dreading it as always. Am hoping to use the dog as an excuse to only stay for a couple of hours.

DS is still keen to go to uni next year. He did the EY Business Academy last summer which is a week long work experience, both at the EY office and on site at a client office. He really enjoyed it, and was offered a place on their apprenticeship (Assurance) next year, but if anything, it made him realise that he absolutely does want to go to uni first.

He’s had unconditional offers from Edinburgh, Glasgow and Heriot Watt (waiting to hear from St Andrews) for Mathematics and Statistics plus a conditional offer from Edinburgh for their joint data science degree/PWC apprenticeship- will be starting the assessment process with PwC at the start of the year.

I never know how the aunties will attack year to year, so if anyone remembers this thread from last year, please do wish us luck on Saturday!

I've worked as a lecturer and now associate professor for 20 years. I kind of know where your aunt is coming from. Massive fees and a marketised system. I'm not saying don't do it.... Just there ARE other ways. I won't be encouraging my DCs to go to uni.

If he wants to be an accountant and can get in on a professional apprentice scheme he would be mad not to! A degree will cost a fortune and he will have to do the professional exams anyway after.

However, if he might not want to be a professional accountant thats fine. Do a maths, stats, computer degree etc and then decide after as these degrees lead to allsorts of other options.

Sounds weird. Is she jealous? Does she have DC?

He doesn’t want to be an accountant! The EY scheme had a choice between tax and assurance. He did it to get an idea of working in a consultancy to see if the PwC apprenticeship/degree still appealed (it does). We’re in Scotland so fees aren’t in the picture.

Did you read the thread about the poster whose daughter went to uni and her friend’s daughter who didn’t go to uni but instead did an apprenticeship? It’s worth a read

I'm thinking of the thread on here 2 days ago: uni graduate working in call centre v her mums friend dd who's done an apprenticeship and earning £70k.

Im an accountant and I do tax and assurance!

Im not saying the EY apprenticeship is definitely a professional accountancy one (the tax could perhaps be CTA only) but I have to say, I would be very surprised if its not aimed at one of the accountancy institutes main qualifications.

Kez I think we have crossed wires here. The EY assurance programme is an Accountancy programme. I’m trying to say that he didn’t do the Business Academy because he was interested in accountancy (because he’s not). He did it because he is interested in the PwC apprenticeship/Edinburgh Data Science degree and wanted to see what it was like working for a consultancy, generally speaking. His father works for a consultancy but is quite senior so speaking to him is different to speaking to people closer to his age about what the experience would be like (placement to placement, working away from home etc). He had a choice of applying for the tax programme or the assurance one- ideally (for him), they would have had data science or actuarial as choices, but they don’t so tax or assurance it was.

He probably would be interested in an EY graduate programme but he definitely wants to do a degree first and not head straight into work in Sept.

If the degree is free and he wants a different angle then it makes sense to do whatever it takes to get to his goal.

Ok if in Scotland it's a different kettle of fish and I would say go for it.

Well done to your ds . If he wants to go to uni and you can afford it, go for it.

As for your aunts... have you ever heard of the Law of Jante? It origins from my country (and is sadly still seen/used here). This is the short version, it might explain your aunts very very narrow mindsets.