To think university is overrated?

[WeAreGypsy]

I did a degree at a normal university, in my early 20s, and although it had its merits I think it was overall an overrated experience.

For this reason I find it hard to recommend to my own children to follow that path. Except for the sciences and vocational courses like law, medicine etc. Or if you have a have a total passion for your subject (I didn't, I just wandered into mine).

The fact that you could leave university at age 21+ with over £40K debts is also a killer for me.

Yet everyone talks about going to university, schools encourage it, and its almost seen as a rite of passage.

Am interested in others' thoughts on this and what you hope for your children.

"As someone who only employs graduates or post grads, my opinion is worth a lot."

You work for a university, you aren't really a good example of an average graduate employer.

I'm despairing a little that someone who works in a university thinks the main value of a degree is the salary you might achieve with it...and that PhD's are narrow...I mean really?

I agree with Bottle, there are many entry level jobs in firms that now just require a degree, where as 20 years ago they would not have.

It depends really. In the civil service you can do a 2 year paid apprenticeship and then get on the graduate scheme without a degree

However degrees are still a valuable route into employment for many companies and as well as this why can't people study what they'd enjoy and like?

I don't have a rounded education topcunt1980. In fact, it has been quite narrow and insular and perhaps more so as I've grown older. My expertise have certainly become narrower. My circle of friends isn't especially diverse and most I've known since we were very young.

You don't say... That shouts from every word of your posts.

When you're directly paying for education, how else do you suggest we measure the value if not graduate salaries? I haven't claimed to be a sociologist so have no doubt there are all kinds of ways to use statistics to show that the tuition fees are worth every penny for generations to come but the most simplistic and often the least misleading would be showing the employment prospects of graduates.

An academic who can't focus beyond that one metric - that's really poor show. Do you not read newspapers, blogs, consider HE policy, read around your narrow focus of expertise (all great values we encourage our undergrads to do) AT ALL? Wow. Ignorance must be bliss eh? Guess you don't think nurses are worthwhile then given their low grad salaries?

Yes. School is also overrated. Kids now through primary and I find myself looking back thinking. "What was that about?"

And actually while we're on it what do you think of the salary stats youngoffender? Robust enough to prove your point? Or not. in which case your argument that shit courses at shit unis have no benefit falls apart somewhat doesn't it.

Youngoffender merely uses the salary stats as she wants.

Oh and its funny that she looks for "women's studies" can't find a unioversity that offers it at undergrad level. Now if we are saying that all post graduate work should also be judged on final salary...

Its just a poor argument, poorly made.

@titchy

"An academic who can't focus beyond that one metric - that's really poor show."

Why? It has never ever been part of my job to consider whether students are making a sound financial investment with the cost of their studies vs expected future income.

"Guess you don't think nurses are worthwhile then given their low grad salaries?"

Obtuse or missed the point? It isn't whether the person or position is "worthwhile" it's whether the cost of the qualification is. Do I think that someone looking to make a nurse' salary is wise to accumulate the debt of a degree? Probably not. As it's a skilled and valuable occupation the sensible approach is to lower the cost of the qualification or raise the salaries. HTH

Almost half of 21 - 35 year olds have a degree. If you’re in the same field, that is your competition. Yes, you can make it without a degree, but if you’re working in an arena where most of your competitors have a degree and you don't, you’re usually at a disadvantage. I work for a university that is committed to widening participation; most of our students are the first person in their family to go to university, and are eligible for maximum loan and grant support. Almost 70% go on to get graduate jobs, or go on to further study, and I’m enormously proud that I work for a university that can do that - that can really change lives. It may not work for everyone, but it works far more than it fails.

If there was one piece of advice I could give, it would be to get students to take part in everything that’s available to them. There are clubs and societies that will expand your network, do a work placement if you can, go to guest speaker talks, go on study trips, use your holidays to work abroad, take up the offer of free or cheap language classes, get a part time job with companies who recruit through the Students union, etc. Lectures and assessment are only a part of being a student. Those who do best throw themselves into university and they emerge with far more than a degree. They have experience, extra qualifications (e.g. we run a coaching qualification and a project management qualification they get in addition to their degree), professional membership, another language, etc. that makes them more employable, and eligible for fast track programmes.

A lot of jobs point blank won't interview you without a degree. I have one, DH doesn't. He has buckets loads more of experience than me and is by far more successful, yet he'll not even hit the interview pile whereas I will.

"Why? It has never ever been part of my job to consider whether students are making a sound financial investment with the cost of their studies vs expected future income."

Yet you are using this as the measurement of whether a degree is worthwhile here, and then go on to make a point about the cost of the qualification later in your argument?

Poor analysis, again demonstrating that you aren't as qualified as you say.

HTH loser.

I went to Uni and it was a complete waste of my time when I feel I could have started a career and educated my way throughout. Genuinely feel going to uni held me back. Feel it's for wanting to do Law/Doctor type degrees & jobs rather than "normal" jobs.

I prefer working to studying

It isn't whether the person or position is "worthwhile" it's whether the cost of the qualification is

Why do you continue to use the cost as the measure of worthwhile? Your job as an academic should stretch beyond simply imparting your subject knowledge. You should have some awareness of current policy, the impact of outreach activity, the importance of WP, your institution's (and department's) TEF score and priorities. But you don't seem to... Maybe you're very junior?

And probably badly paid, so that Oxbridge education is worth fuck all.