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?

Not impressed by a degree in Biomedical Scirnce from South Bank?

Really? How much biomedical science do most of us know? I don't think I'd be sneering at anyone who can examine the cells of a smear test.

Impressed by English from Exeter? They've read some books and then written about the books that other people wrote.

It's such a false dichotomy. Oxbridge "Ooh"
Polytechnics "Boo"

Where does the line fall? Should I be impressed by a degree from Stirling? Aston? Dundee? Aberystwyth? Brunel? Salford? Portsmouth? Bradford? (Hands up those who can't remember which of these used to be Polytechnics so that they can sneer more easily).

It’s an occupational requirement for my DD’s job, institution matters too, hers was rated 1st in the U.K. for her course, above imperial, Oxford and Cambridge!

It's because this is becoming less and less the case, and it looks like a trend that will continue.

Yes, there are some jobs that really do require a degree, in the sense that you really learn the things you will need to do for your work and also there isn't another way to get that knowledge.

But many don't, it's entirely possible to learn through an on the job or apprenticeship arrangement if the employer cares to bother, and the fact is that many employers feel universities are not producing particularly good quality graduates.

In fact I've heard more than a few say they are finding the university graduates are worse - poor workers and rigid thinkers who expect a lot of pay and time off.

You don’t need a degree to teach in private schools, I had a friend who was a history teacher at a private school - he did have a degree but in something like Biology, he just basically learnt the coursework ahead of the kids and taught them it!

Journalists didn't typically have degrees in the past, and certainly not in journalism.The rise of the journalism degree has actually corresponded significantly with a decline in quality. Many of the great writer-journalists of the 20th century - Earnest Hemmingway, Hunter S Thompson, Truman Capote, for example - didn't have degrees either, many were self-educated and far more literate than today's university graduates.

The arts weren't always focused around universities either, even writers.

I did a Mickey Mouse degree at a uni that has been mentioned in this thread already in a negative light. I don't regret a second of it; I had an amazing time and was able to relate experiences gained on the degree to job interview questions, so employability wasn't an issue either. Three of the best years of my life.

I then did a PGCE in English (a subject I only studied to A Level), got a distinction, and became a pretty bloody good English teacher - if I say so myself! 😁

I don't know if degrees are as "worth it" anymore, but I'd say the experience of going to uni - yes, even a bottom of the table ex-poly - is definitely worth it.

Interesting topic. Some employers now only advertise a degree as an essential requirement if it can be demonstrated that the job can only be done by someone with a degree. Tide is definitely changing. It is true that practical experience is more highly valued than a degree, particularly when the degree has no relation to the role.

No, many students read very little. Some of the things friends and families who teach at universities - good ones - have described to me:

• Fourth year undergrads unable to write a research paper for a professional class without significant hand-holding. In the end the paper was replaced by a recorded presentation because there was no time in the class to teach basic research.
• Students who do not read anything other than the basic required texts - they will not read any supporting literature mentioned by the professors.
• Students who won't read the texts to the point that reading is now done in class.
• Students who are accommodated in classes leading to professional qualifications who will never e capable of working in the profession - for example cannot do presentations or answer questions in class while working on a law degree.
• Students allowed to submit work 6 months after the official deadline.

All of these situations are because the university insists on keeping and passing the students, not because the teachers are at all happy about it.

I advised my DC to get a degree either via uni or by an apprenticeship because working life is long and it is easier to change career with a degree than without one and it is much easier to complete a degree when you are younger plus all the social benefits/connections you make with other people. University is not just about the piece of paper.

Does every job need a degree? No but will you be disadvantaged if you do not have one. Yes and until this changes and vocational training is improved that the default advice I would give would be to complete a degree.

This is way too broad yes some degrees are generic and not very employable to the numbers that do them, others are not.

If in a scientific field the bare minimum is a degree. In my team I'm one of the least qualified with a masters.

Apart from specific sectors where you really need a degree (medicine etc.) unless that young person is very passionate about learning a specific subject then I don't see the point anymore. And even if they are passionate they shouldn't go into debt for it, so really it becomes a way for the wealthy to further their knowledge.

I'm in the legal industry and we have now introduced solicitor apprenticeships which didn't exist when I started practice. I think they're brilliant - the firm sponsors a young person to do their degree and law school whilst working part time, gaining experience and eventually qualifying as a solicitor. I guess the downside is that's a huge commitment for someone as young as 18 to sign up for, but it's brilliant for opening doors to the profession and putting the onus on profitable employers who require a higher level of education to meet the costs.

Again, the apprenticeship route still involves them doing a degree. Just while they are working. The legal profession can’t support everyone doing apprenticeships because of the costs to law firms. So there is still a place for the traditional route and that will remain the way that most people will gain their degree.
Personally having trained as a solicitor and working as one and not particularly liking it, I’m not sure about 18 year olds making a choice that sets you down a particular career at such a young age. My students now have the option of a sandwich year where they spend a year working in a law firm. Many of them decide it’s not for them and pursue something else post-graduation. A lot of students begin a law degree with the aspiration of being a lawyer but decide to do something else because the reality doesn’t appeal. I’d be worried about solicitor apprentices realising two years in that they didn’t like it and feeling they had wasted time.

Still need degrees/masters etc. for a lot of corporate jobs.
It’s a good thing that degrees aren’t an elitist thing anymore. Why shouldn’t lots of people have them?

What else is it about? Especially when it is being subsidized?

The airy fairy ‘oh I want to go to university for the experience’ attitude is nonsense when you can’t actually afford to pay for it yourself. So yes, it is about getting jobs because other people are subsidizing it and needs to benefit the economy.

what does the degree itself give you this question is hilarious!

A degree gives you subject knowledge, obviously. Plus it demonstrates a level and standard of education which is higher than those who don't have a degree.

I'm fine with a parallel rigorous work-based route into teaching, but I'm not getting behind the idea you can teach just as well with only A-levels, that would be a massive drop in standards.

Degrees do benefit the economy! What kind of economic future do you envisage for the UK if the population were significantly less educated than other similar nations?

Saying having a degree is not as impressive and meaningful as it used to be, does not mean mean they are useless and unnecessary.

UK productivity is in the toilet. Or had you missed that crucial fact. Millions studying Mickey Mouse degrees has done nothing for UK economy whatsoever.

Not all degrees are born equal. If you want to study for a useless degree, you can pay for the full cost yourself, no one is stopping you. If you want your degree to be subsidized, then it should be something that something ‘benefits the economy’ as you say. Because no, not all degrees benefit the economy.

How is this relevant to today?

As you say teaching colleges closed. No one is saying in yesteryear alternative training wasn’t adequate.

But how is this point relevant now? Except saying further education has always been desired to teach? Which was kind of my initial point.

But we don’t know which ones they will be.
The UK’s music and film industries are a huge contribution to the economy, so I guess all film, acting and music degrees should be on the list.

Ermm no. Thats not how the arts industry works. The revenue is generated by film studios and technical expertise to operate and innovate in them. As fun as they are to watch, it’s not the people with media study and drama degrees holding up the film industry. It’s the visual, sound and set engineers, the CGI and special effects experts, and people in business behind the scenes. You know….those people with STEM skills!

The “degrees are pointless” is the other side of the coin to the argument “trades are lower class”

Basically a whole bunch of strangers trying to outdo each other online with their family’s working choices and making out they are better (read richer) than others. Or their children are more successful (read so clearly I am a better parent)

Many of us value contentment and being a decent human being above degree v trade.

There are decent and dreadful people in all walks of life, male and female.

Calling a degree “impressive” is utter snobbery. You would be surprised at the vast array of unimpressive degrees that contribute to your life being easier, more enjoyable, safer.

If a doctor’s toilet flushes up he needs a plumber
If a roofer falls he needs a doctor

And in between broken toilets and broken backs we enjoy films, books, eating, visiting theme parks, knitting or whatever.

We need each other, not snobbery.

Some of which will have , according to some, unimpressive degrees.
There will be some actors, some musicians involved.

There are film crithc journalists who people refer to to chose what to watch, people who advise and analyse the industry, because where there are millions there are thousands of jobs.

This isn’t a dissection of an industry argument, and my flippant point, was that we export and enjoy a huge creative industry. But for some it’s not a trade or medicine, we should all be sitting in regulated clothing, on identical sofas, watching government produced tv and reading approved literature. Because creative degrees aren’t impressive.

But given you can teach a subject without a subject degree (and there are other ways of potentially getting better subject knowledge for some subjects), WHY does having a a degree (or higher standard of education) make you a better teacher? A teaching apprenticeship could give you a higher level of education than A levels and deliver the same results.

I’d actually prefer the conditions be that you have to have five years of experience outside of an education environment so that teachers had more real world experience rather than a degree.

But as I’ve said all along, there should still be a requirement for a PGCE, or rather a similar non post grad qualification with similar content.

They are impressive, if you can afford to pay for it yourself. Fill your boots. That’s the beauty of the market economy. You can indulge in consumerism all you like if are prepared to pay for it.

But if you except other people to subsidize your degree, then it has to add net financial value to the economy.