to be shocked at the poor quality of graduates

[tredaswe]

At work we are recruiting for a graduate trainee position and we have been swamped with applications. I've been doing the sift and the standard of applications is absolutely woeful. At least half of them have spelling and/or punctuation errors in, many of the cover letters are so general you get the impression that they are sending them to every job they are applying for and there are even some that are applying to different companies than us.

From the initial 79 that we received only 6 don't have at least one or more of these flaws. AIBU to think that with youth unemployment people should be putting far more effort into their applications.

'Many previous generations managed to produce good spelling and grammar in their exam papers.'

This isn't really true. Or rather, it is true, but do you not realize how many more people do degree exams now? You can't realistically compare the tiny number of people two generations ago who went to university, who were rigorously drilled, with the numbers who go now.

I'm sure it is annoying for you, but I bet your bosses said the same about you when you were new.

I agree Wicked.
Otherwise what is the point of a degree-level education?

I totally agree with BrokenSunglasses on P1 - through being constantly being 'taught to the test' and told that spelling and presentation is not important 'as it's not worth any / hardly worth any marks' throughout their lives, many youngsters don't seem to realise the importance of it.
My ds (17) e-mailed me his CV to print out for him as wifi not working for our printer and I was really shocked at the number of basic spelling / grammar errors on it. Had I been the prospective employer, I'd have put it in the bin, not because he can't spell (he can) but because he didn't consider the job application important enough to spend time making sure it was done correctly.
It's not the same as typos / grammar / spelling mistakes on an internet forum where you just tap away merrily at the keyboard, it's about whether you are prepared to spend the extra hour 'making the effort' because you really want the job. To my mind, it equates to polishing your shoes or ironing your shirt - it shows you want to make a good impression.

"I did find myself baffling at the ability of people to mispell basic words when spell check exists. "

misspell then.

anyway, when I was actively applying for jobs, I had a killer CV and covering letter.
perfectly written, no mistakes.

didn't get me many jobs (interviews - I'm awfully dreadful at interviews)

but I've helped friends loads of times who are brilliant but cannot do CVs and covering letters. (and they've got the jobs because they were good at interviews)

"I lay part of the blame with the Job Centre. People are being sanctioned for 'only' applying for 30 jobs a week. Some advisors are telling people they have to apply for at least 60 jobs per week. Factor in the search time to find a job to apply for and it doesn't leave long per application"

which is why I often get the people who "do the rounds"
people who come in with their form once a fortnight and say "sign here, luv, to say there's no job" (yes, really, those exact words)
I used to refuse - and tell them exactly why. you don't just come into the shop and tell me that I have no jobs. you ask me politely if there are any vacancies, then apologise for bothering me to give you a signature for your form.

and those debating: "different from" is correct "different to" is wrong (no matter what modern life might have) and "different than" is US

Some of it is the lecturers though, I bit my tongue for half a semester but eventually had to tell the lecturer that no we wouldn't be 'more readier to....'.

But then she also corrected my English spelling to the American version, and she was supposed to be assessing my English.

I went to uni in my 30s, I applied for a few graduate trainee jobs knowing I needed to start at the bottom again but I was turned down for all of them because I had, "too much experience", well general life experience yes I do, but I didn't have the skills to apply for jobs higher up the scale.

thewicked - I don't disagree with that, to be honest. But it's not my decision! It must be obvious to everyone that you cannot expect the same standards of 50% of the population that you could exact from a much smaller elite, can you?

So, either we must accept that the purpose of university has changed dramatically - which is reflected in the fact that all sorts of jobs are now 'graduate entry' which were not previously - or we must question whether it's right to send 50% of 18 year olds to university (and to cut back on options for those who don't go, which seems to have happened).

Personally I wish we could do a bit of both of these. But it is silly not to recognize what has happened and to stand decrying the situation without trying to understand it.

I do also think it is absolutely idiotic to pretend spelling and grammar are the point of a university education.

Its not just the applications though, it is depressing the number of graduates that I have invited in to interview who look great on paper but turn out to be idiots in person. Turning up late, inappropriately dressed, have no idea about the company they have applied to, no questions about the role they hope to fill and generally have a level of arrogance that suggests that all have to do is turn up and the job is theirs. I am not sure if it is a lack of preparation/tuition at uni or just laziness on the part of the applicant but there is a wealth of free information out there with regards to basic good interview preparation, there is really no excuse.

LRD,"it is absolutely idiotic to pretend that spelling and grammar are the point of a university education".

I couldn't agree more. It is not unreasonable to expect that students entering university can write essays etc. Students are not supposed to be 'taught' a degree, the phrase is 'reading for a degree' for a reason. University level education is about exploring the details of the subject and taking understanding of the subject to the next level. It is not about correcting the educational deficiencies of school.

thewicked - yes, I agree, I think it is really unfair that a lot of students are being pushed through university simply because someone decided they could be.

I do think some people do seem to believe that if your spelling and grammar isn't perfect, you're somehow not worthy of a university education. I do think it's silly. Why does someone need to lose credibility for the odd slip, unless the person judging it is a snob?

I do think it has to depend on the context. Obviously, in a job application, these things should ideally be perfect, mainly to indicate that the applicant was courteous enough to their prospective employer to take the time to read through the application properly, and conscientious enough to suggest they will be a careful worker. However, if you're employing a proofreader, it will also matter hugely for the actual job. If you're employing an engineer, maybe rather less so.

In fact, I think people get so hung up on having a go at new graduates, they forget how easy it is for all of us to make mistakes.

Cross post.

YY magrat.

Besides which, honestly, who is going to look at a student who writes a brilliant, interesting analysis of their subject and grouch 'yeah, but you ended three sentences with prepositions and there's a typo in line four'.

You just run a red pen through it.

Spelling and grammar mistakes are 'fashionable' like anything else, so people make different ones from their parents or grandparents, but I don't think there's really any evidence people nowadays make more errors.

I agree CuChulain. My personal favourite was a geography student who turned up an hour late recently because she got lost. I'd sent her a map, directions and had encouraged her to set off early to ensure she found the office.

Then when we did the interview it turned out she hadn't looked at our company website, had no idea who our clients were and got one of the basic technical issues completely wrong. She didn't get the job.

Of course we make mistakes, and that is why reviewing, proof-reading and editing are also useful skills. But as Wicked says, if that is the attitude of the job seeker, then it should not come as a surprise if they are not considered for jobs that require a certain level of literacy.
Self-selecting the recycle bin.

Yeah, I get that silver.

They are useful skills. I did just post saying that for some jobs they are absolutely crucial.

What I don't think is ok is to decide that, based on a few crappy applications, it's ok to write off 'graduates' as a group as lazy and entitled.

Frankly, I think some people are kidding themselves if they believe the situation has changed, and they're pointing to other people's errors to make themselves feel better. That's fine in private, but it's a bit crap to post about it, the same way it'd be a bit rude to post 'AIBU to be shocked that young people are so ugly these days, look at all the horrible fashions they think it's ok to wear in their professional lives'.

I don't know what other university departments do, but we certainly penalise for spelling, grammar and apostrophe errors: it's a separate category on our marking sheets.

Having said that, students do seem to write very badly these days- and read very little. They are told at the beginning of the year how many minimum hours they should be putting in for each module; when you get to the end of the year and they are filling in their feedback questionnaires, which includes the question "how many hours did you spend on preparation?", only a handful will be anywhere near the minimum hours, and the ones who complain about the course being too difficult and the reading list too long will invariably be far below.

TheWickedBitchOfTheBest Fri 23-Aug-13 14:28:15
"LRDPog your spelling and grammar doesn't have to be perfect, who's is? "

Indeed.

(sorry, couldn't resist)

wicked - sorry, but that's just rubbish.

Students who make occasional slips do not go 'to the bottom of the pile'. Yes, there are plenty of students who have perfect SPAG.

I don't know what 'technically able' means, btw. A student who is 'technically able' should be able in the relevent (degree level) techniques relevant to their subject. Unless perhaps someone is studying English language or Linguistics, I can't see how SPAG would come into it. Even there, I imagine SPAG are only a very small part of the technical skills required.

People massively over-estimate how important these skills are.

If you as an employer want a person who has great SPAG, fine, that's totally valid. But why confuse it with someone's degree qualification? And why pretend this is a new phenomenon?

With respect to cory who will know better about students, I do think in the general population, SPAG has improved hugely over the last couple of generations. Just look at how many people didn't become properly literate in the 40s and 50s, and compare with today.

Young people can be their own worst enemies, as we all know once we have survived the teenage years. Some schools seem to do better than others in teaching gumption and a bit of common sense and courtesy. I don't think the culture of easy A levels followed by soft degrees has been at all helpful in producing young people with a bit of initiative and self discipline.

I think I learned more about professionalism and high standards from having a musical training as a child at one of the big London music colleges than I ever did from my Oxford degree. And I graduated in 1984 so am one of the ancient brigade.

I realise I now sound like the love child of Maggie Thatcher and Atilla the Hun.