To say that university degrees are barely impressive anymore?

[PithyKhakiShaker]

It feels like degrees are everywhere now and half the time they don’t guarantee anything - not a good job, not better thinking skills, not even basic literacy sometimes. Obviously education matters but AIBU to think degrees have become so common and so varied in quality that they aren’t as impressive or meaningful as they used to be?

@Dlooped it sounds like she's struggled in some ways, perhaps family background or depression etc.
Most people do want to have fun enjoyable lives after all. And her education whilst not bringing her employment may still enrich her life

It's so very tedious.

The endless snark about degrees in "cushion plumping" as though it's not possible to study bollocks at RG settings.

University shouldn't be for everyone.

It isn't. Around 40% of school leavers go to university. In some areas that figure is lower.
Everyone isn't going to university.

You’ve got the wrong end of the stick so need to get arsey.

I meant did the higher up position(s) really require a degree or is she actually quite capable of performing the job and the degree requirement is unnecessary.

People like me? I never went to university.

Two of sons friends did apprenticeships in construction and the car industry. They both bought their first homes last year aged 23 and 24.

Ten a penny. I know very few people without a degree. My job supposedly requires a degree but I've never been asked about it, not have I had to prove it.

Good life experience though!

Not convinced that’s the same thing.

But is that the graduate’s fault or the standard of teaching?

I did my degree last year. Found it an absolute piece of piss, didn't really have to work hard and still got a first.

Not convinced a qualification to teach English as a foreign language is the same as a native speaker of another language getting a similar qualification and being qualified to teach that… ?!

What about if they had a TEFL qualification and a PGCE (or equivalent from their country)? Is that still not enough? You think a degree in history might make them more qualified to teach MFL?

Because to be clear, a MFL degree is NOT a pre requisite to be a MFL teacher (getintoteaching.education.gov.uk/life-as-a-teacher/explore-subjects/languages)

That would be fine. As long as they had a teaching qualification. In this country you need a degree to do the PGCE.

We had free degrees during this era, makes a whole lot of difference to your future. Also not everyone in the 90s had a degree. Most people I knew in the 90s with a degree are successful.

Why are they wrong? I very much agree with the points they make

My original point was that someone could be a good teacher without a degree.

If the PGCE was available to someone without a degree (I appreciate it’s not) then they could still be a great teacher without a degree.

I would support a PGCE equivalent that wasn’t post grad in some circumstances, and I stand by my questioning of “I’d like to see someone teach a class without a degree”… because why, what does the degree itself give you? Other than access to an unrelated, non-degree equivalent that you need to be able to teach.

Ok, that's fair enough. I'm no expert so educate me on the subject.

Son is a scientist got out of the industry for a few years. Went back in recently. He's noticed a difference in the graduates. The casual attitude when mistakes are made is one thing that shocked him.

Also TESOL level 7 is an equivalent qualification to a PGCE, so I don’t understand your logic of a PGCE being good enough but TEFL qualifications aren’t.

In a world of diminishing attention spans and social media driven attention economy I find many degrees more impressive than ever to be honest.

Eg English literature - when I studied it was three years reading on average 6-10
books a week. Novels, literacy criticism, biographies, essays, poetry. Writing long essays with original (as much as an undergrad can!) analysis and reflections on the text. Making considered, robust and intellectual interventions in seminars. Talking about books. Reading more.

Similar for other humanities degrees: history, classics, politics.

I guess not every graduate does this. But those who do, it’s quite an impressive feat to use your brain in this way, no?

Also firsts. When I was at uni in 90s, firsts were rare. Very few people got them

I really think it is a case of demand and supply decreasing the value.

Education is big business, and there are so many higher learning istitutions now that the more people get degrees, the less impressive they are. When I graduated in 2005 I couldn't get a job because I had no work experience, and now I think its even worse.

I had some assistance with fees- i.e. I got in before you had to pay the full wack of tution fees. Not-one person cares about my BSc. and my MSc, they only care about experience. Now 21year olds are 30K in debt for somehting that isn't worth that amount of investment.

If I was someone was 15-18 years old I would recommend they travel/work/military/train in a skill so they can then save up for university and go when they are a bit older and decide if the money is worth it. I know many people at work go back to and do degrees related to the field they are in whilst working.

I don't think to be a B5 nurse you need the level of acedemic knowledge of a
BSc. degree. Training absolutely, and that should be funded but as you aren't diagnosing or prescribing or researching then diploma level will be enough for entry level.

For vocational quals I think degree level training should be for medicine, legal and engineering due to the risk to life. Maybe physio/SLT/Dietician as you are diagnosing and their legal/engineering equivelent.

I did a masters a few years ago. Two things…It was a pretty highly ranked university and was in the arts but v. practical. I learnt a lot. However, I realised by seeing other students’ work at the end of the year (there was a presentation of work that would be equivalent to a dissertation- the bulk of your marks) - many people clearly hadn’t done the work required for even a pass. There was a checklist of certain things that needed to be in your work in order to pass, some students didn’t hit any of those points yet I found out after, many of them got merits. I also got a merit but I worked my ass off for it and hit all the points required to pass and more. It really made me think all they were interested in was the money and keeping their reputation intact by handing out good results to people that clearly hadn’t actually achieved the things they needed to in order to pass.

Secondly, and I hope I don’t sound in any way racist 😬 (not my intention at all) but around half the students were Chinese, and as international students they pay at least double. Some of them could barely understand or speak English. You’re supposed to have a high score on the international English language test to get onto an English speaking degree (for obvious reasons). There’s no way some of the students would have passed this - they could barely hold a basic conversation, yet many also got Merits. How? The only explanation is the university is greedy and only interested in money and was taking these students despite the fact they didn’t have sufficient English language skills to understand what was being said in lectures/do the reading etc etc. and deliberately marking them higher so as to keep their appeal to international students. That was my opinion anyway.

Who cares if it’s impressive though? It still gives you financial and other advantages and is worth doing. Guessing most of the people who claim degrees mean nothing don’t have one.
Why should we hark back to the days when almost no working class children went to uni and many left at 14 with zero qualifications? That wasn’t good. Anyone who wants to study further after school should have the opportunity. Even if they don’t end up going into a “graduate job”. It’s still worthwhile.

This is snobbery. Education doesn't have to be academic i.e research modules. Noone is stopping a nurse doing a degree, but a majority of B5 nursing doesn't require the type of academic training that a BSc. has and all to do with the type of hands on training that a diploma has.

Really? There used to be plenty of teachers without degrees. They went to teacher training college (A levels were sufficient for entry) and then straight into teaching. The teacher training colleges were pretty much abolished by Margaret Thatcher in the 1970-80s and the few that were left were subsumed into unis/polys. That led to a significant reduction in the numbers of teachers. Maybe there’s a lesson to be learnt here!

I was taught by several excellent teachers who didn’t have degrees, one of whom was my (late) mother. She came from a poor working class background and whilst she was very bright, university was never an option for financial reasons. She only managed teacher training college after she married and my father was able to work 2 manual jobs to support them both while she was training.

I can’t stand the snobbery about degrees. Having a degree doesn’t mean you’re intelligent, it just means you’re good at passing exams (or doing coursework these days). You can be super bright and successful without a degree. Just as you can be an utter idiot with a degree (or several).

Edit: just to add that I do have a degree myself. But as my mother liked to remind me (frequently!) “you might be good at passing exams but that doesn’t mean you’ve got common sense”. 😂

I agree, big employers seem to have their own assessments for aptitude now, with quals not always as important.