Which Degrees are pretty 'pointless'?

[DreadLock]

Just starting to look at courses with DS. So many choices. BUT I am sure there are some which are not particularly going to lead to much. Employers - what do you look for on a CV and what would you avoid?
And any other 'views' are welcome.
DS not even sure if he wants to go to UNI so we are having a good look into stuff.

Brighton uni offer a degree in event management (BA). What on earth do you do a dissertation in?

A lot of ex students (and their parents) refer to Solent as Southampton (because it's called Southampton Solent) and it's very (deliberately?) misleading.

I don't know anything about an events management degree but I'm sure I could work up a really respectable dissertation proposal incorporating management or organisational theory. In other words I think there probably very worthwhile underpinnings to these degrees but the titles let them down

I took a number of professional courses at London Met as it was one of the few places I could do Corporate Secretaryship (a well paid professional role) in London. I thought it very well taught. I wouldn't choose to do an undergraduate degree in London at all though.

Many degrees don't do dissertations in any case. It was optional on my course and dh didn't do one at all. We both had them for our masters though.

I am not sure why Southampton Solent is the one singled out- it isn't even bottom of the league table. It is like anything, the student really needs to do their research on their particular subject and find the best place. Southampton Solent yacht design course has produced some of the most successful and influential designers in the industry. Obviously it is a niche, but if someone wants a career to do with sailing they don't want to be put off because it has a poor reputation for other subjects.
The student needs to work out what they want to do, do all their research, visit, see the facilities, ask the questions and decide.
I wouldn't recommend just opting for a subject and going to a RG university in the thought it will open doors. My eldest son is 10 years older than the youngest and employment opportunities for graduates are much, much harder in that 10 years. I know RG graduates who have walked into jobs, I also know RG graduates who are working as sales assistants and coffee shops while they apply for jobs that have over 100 applicants for every place.
Wuldric's criteria apply to her field- it doesn't necessarily apply elsewhere. Another part of the research is to find out the employment criteria for your field. We have too many students doing law- a complete waste of time unless you go to an establishment with a good track record.

Why is a degree is Nordic whatsit ok but not events or hospitality management? I can really only see snobbery. Universities examine the world around them, be that the events management or hospitality management or Nordic stuff (technical). Whatever the subject they'll be developing the same kinds of critical thinking, making connections, written and analytical skills etc. The difference I can see between the subjects is one is the kind of waffley abstract stuff reserved for rich people in dusty libraries to get all elitist about, the other is a more vocational subject traditionally done by the 'plebs'. People just use the subject stuff as an excuse for the class/background stuff.

I have a degree in a pure humanities subject which many people would see as irrelevant nowadays, but the majority of my year group in my subject at university went into the city (banking, law, accountancy) or into publishing, HR and heritage work. I am one of a minority working in the subject itself.
If it's a good university and a good degree class (1st or 2.1 these days really) then the subject doesn't really matter that much.

They also need to be mature enough to handle the freedom and the workload. As the parent you will only know what they choose to tell you.
I can't see the point of getting a place in a prestigious university if they have only got that far with close supervision from parents.
They now need at least a 2.1.
They also need to work out if they can work alone. Both of mine had heavy timetables because they worked in labs. My nephew had 7 hours contact time and the rest of the time he was on his own. Not all can handle that, especially fresh from school.
With the huge fees they need to get it right- many would be better with a gap to see if it is really what they want.

Yes, probably just snobbery but unfortunately snobbery rules. It may not be right but the fact remains that your chances of getting a graduate job with a FTSE 100 company or getting into law are very small if you have the 'events management' type of degree from the 'Southampton Solent' type of university.

And yes, don't pay any attention to what degrees people got years ago. It has completely changed. A 2:2 in a new graduate is no longer acceptable to most blue chip companies, unless you are an exceptional candidate. Most grad recruitment schemes have a filter which automatically reject people who got less than a 2:1 or ABB. They have so many applicants they don't need to justify it.

What you want to do with your degree is the most important factor though. There are plenty of graduate professions which do not involve working in the City or for blue chip companies.

Many teachers, nurses, pharmacists etc will have degrees which qualify them to do their job and make them very employable, but may not be from RG universities or 2.1 or 1st. In science, an honours degree, regardless of class or institution obtained from is considered insufficient, you really need a PhD to be qualified for most jobs beyond being a technician.

Basically, a 2.1 from a RG university is not an immediate key to employability, but likewise, a 2.2 or lower from a 'new' university will not automatically mean the employment scrap-heap. As someone said earlier, choose what you want to do first, then choose the most suitable qualification to get you there.

The thing is many (most?) young people don't know what they want to do at seventeen/eighteen years old.

If either of mine have no clear plan (and I wouldn't expect them to), I'd advise them to go to the most well thought of university they could manage. Just to keep their options open.

As others have said though, times are changing and I think the days of going to university to study something interesting for 3 years whilst deciding what to do are coming to an end. I have to say, in my work, I meet a lot of very driven and determined young people who know exactly what they want to do and are prepared to pull out all the stops to get themselves there. These young people are much more focused than students were 'in my day' (I'm old) where you went to university to study something you enjoyed with only vague ideas about what you would do later. That luxury of not bothering to grow up and figure out what to do with your life is just less available to young adults now.

Maybe for humanities and arts. For science and maths, perhaps worryingly only approx. 50% of teachers have a 2.1 or higher. IME there is also a big increase in people taking subject knowledge enhancement courses in shortage subjects before doing a PGCE having come in with degrees with insufficient subject content.

There are degrees in all kinds of universities which have their own reputation and will get you a job. This is usually because the staff work very hard at links with employers and work experience. In the industry, people know which degrees they rate. If you are 18 you don't know which the good ones are, and it can be very hard to find out, though the Unistats data is bound to help people to see wh gets the jobs.

The problem you have is finding out which the really good ones are. A different subject from the same Uni might be feeble and no help to your future at all, it isn't about the Uni when you are dealing with these individual, highly respected courses.

But there is also a segment where people recruit for generic graduate skills. There it does tend to be much more about the brand of the Uni itself, and in that case, only around 10 unis have that kind of brand. Not even "all RG" have an equally strong brand for this.

That said, no disrespect to Nordic studies etc, but even at highly rated unis there are some subjects that would raise a bit of an eyebrow.

As others have said though, times are changing and I think the days of going to university to study something interesting for 3 years whilst deciding what to do are coming to an end. I have to say, in my work, I meet a lot of very driven and determined young people who know exactly what they want to do and are prepared to pull out all the stops to get themselves there. These young people are much more focused than students were 'in my day' (I'm old) where you went to university to study something you enjoyed with only vague ideas about what you would do later. That luxury of not bothering to grow up and figure out what to do with your life is just less available to young adults now.

This is so, so true. It a different world. When they come out the other end they have to be driven and determined. You can't just come out with a good degree from a good university and think it is the passport to a good future-it isn't. The determined and driven from a lesser university stand more chance of employment. In my experience it is relatively easy to go all through the system, jumping through the right hoops; it is when you get out at the end that you hit the real world with a bang. In the real world probably at least 60, maybe triple figures, want the same job and out of that at least a dozen will be just as well qualified.
As a parent it has been the the hardest thing to watch them try and launch a career, knowing that they have to do it all themselves.
It was hard when my eldest came out but nothing compared to how hard it is now.
With the present fees I would advise not going yet if you have no idea what you want at the end. Live a little and find out. It is too much money to spend just doing a subject that you like, or or good at, and hoping it will open the right doors.

The snobbery is more complex though. That's why I mentioned way back about how it's far more complex. Snobbery extends far beyond the degree. I don't believe for one minute an Oxbridge graduate from a poorer background, or even ordinary background will have the same prospects as one who went to the 'right' school and whose father knows the 'right' father. Another reason why it's important to think about what's right for the particular child. I didn't go to Oxbridge in part because I didn't always want to be an outsider and play the game to become an insider. For some it could be a great opportunity to build those networks, if they can manage it. For others it would be 3 miserable years.

Yes indeed, it would suit some very well. I thought I included both sides on that in my response as I agree, for some it's a life changing opportunity. But not for all.

Wuldric writes it as it is - that is how the better recruiters for the better paid jobs recruit. People who do not like that can ignore it and find it hard to get those jobs or they can go for different types (i.e. worse paid lower status) jobs. However do have the knowledge. Know what matters for those employers. Pretending the institution and class of degree and mostly As at A level in decent subjects do not matter does not really help anyone.

I don't agree that if you go to Oxbridge from a poor background as someone said above you then find it much harder to get jobs after because father's influence and contacts count. That really is not so these days - the first stage of your banking, law etc job is often an on line test or set of criteria which will be based on exam results. I suppose if you are brilliant but you cannot speak in sentences in a job which requires speaking then yes that might be held against you but the City is genuinely full of 20 somethings from state schools who went to Oxbridge from fairly difficult circumstances and work very hard and do well.

I agree that contacts aren't everything. The best they can do is get you work experience, which is very useful. But they can't actually get you a job (again I'm talking about big companies here because that is all my experience). The application process has several stages, the first of which are run by HR and comprise verbal/numerical tests etc. It is much more regulated than it used to be, which is good. Talent will out, imo.

People recruiting for the better paid jobs do not regard all RG universities as equal, I can assure you. Durham and Exeter have gained no cachet from joining the RG, rather they have conferred cachet on some of the more 'really? Are you sure?' members.