Is an arts degree from Oxbridge useless?

[Whitlandcarm]

I mean something like Archaeology, or History or Anthropology, HPS specialising in Sociology etc

Would it be better to get into a “lesser” university to study something like Economics, Law etc?

Some Oxbridge courses seem to have average grad salaries of as low as £22k. Is there something effecting these figures such as people going into further study, part time work etc?

So is the learning here that:

Graduates of law who did it by conversion shows real passion for the subject as opposed to 18yr olds who were probably shoe horned into by mummy and daddy.

OR

DH is a prejudiced against anything but Oxbridge - RG, non RG and ex-poly all should definitely go in the bin.

which one?

So, taking Oxbridge out of the equation, would you say that degrees from RG universities have a pretty similar value, then degrees from non RG universities and ex polytechnics are a level down from that and have a similar value?

I am just trying to understand the system BTW. I never went to university, and back in my day there was a clear demarcation between universities and polytechnics.

It costs a lot of money to convert to law as a postgrad. Favouring such students is surely just favouring people with rich parents who can afford to study for a couple more years at extortionate expense.

But doesn't law pays well? Once they are qualified surely they can pay it back with their student loan repayments, or do they not get a loan for converting?

Definitely the first one. And I didn’t say he just took on Oxbridge graduates. I said he would favour an Oxbridge graduate regardless of their initial degree as his assumption, which you are free to disagree with, was that regardless of subject they had experienced academic rigour in a way that many non Oxbridge students had not. He took on plenty of graduates from RG universities. My point was that he was almost subject blind when it came to Oxbridge.

Lonicera, I think you might be able to rank academic degrees to some extent. So Durham history would be almost universally considered more academically rigorous than Plymouth. However less academic applicants might be advised to consider an applied/vocational degree. And then you get some real outliers. For example Product Design at Northumbria.

Many law jobs outside London are not paid well. There is an oversupply of graduates.

DH knew other men and a few women doing similar jobs, some of whom would literally just bin the top 1/3-1/2 of the applicants pile rather than read all 200. At least DH would read them. Poor grammar or spelling would have them put straight on the ‘no’ pile though. They always had to include some sort of hand written thing too which he scrutinised. I think it definitely put my older boys off going into law. DD, however, is 11 and very keen.

I said he would favour an Oxbridge graduate regardless of their initial degree as his assumption, which you are free to disagree with,

You call it favouring, I call it prejudice/bias. I'm still unsure what wisdom he was imparting to his old state school. Was it that they should all aim for Oxbridge then?

Sadly, in some professions, it is still about "who you know". So although it's true that the country is run by people with arts degrees from Oxford, it could be because they had good connections in the first place. I worked in publishing in the 90s and although someone with an Oxford arts degree would be employed, they wouldn't be necessarily progress unless (a) they were exceptionally brilliant (which admittedly did happen) or (b) well connected in some way. The average Oxford arts graduate got a bit lost in the mix!

And although I agree with people saying degree choice should be about studying something you love, not everyone can afford to make that choice. My DH got a place to study history at Oxford but had to opt for vocational training to support his bankrupt family.

I think what you’re not factoring in and perhaps you should, is that a lot of people (even these days) at Oxbridge don’t see salary as the be all and end all.

I have two cousins, one studied Geograohy at Girton and the other PPE at Trinity.

Both got great degrees, but the one wh studied PPE is now retraining as a midwife after a brief spate in the city and the other is somewhere in the rainforest working for an animal charity.

Neither of them need to work as they have enough of an income from various properties they have been given and a private allowance from their parents.

There will be a lot of people at Oxbridge who are similarly privileged and who care more about the job they do than it’s pay.

Even us distinctly not rich people don't necessarily care about pay that much.

ohyou - Genuinely curious why that it?

Because lifestyle is more important for me. I can say that because, although we aren't rich, we have enough to live on.

God this thread is appalling.

If your dcs are that motivated by money tell them to go straight into work.

Leave the places at uni for kids that really want them!

Because lifestyle is more important for me. I can say that because, although we aren't rich, we have enough to live on.

This sentiment is what a lot of people condemning those looking at pay miss, that this is entirely a privilege others don't have. When you come from an a third world country for instance, lifestyle is not your priority its just simply living.

The reason why they can't race out and get into work is because they need qualifications. They need those university places just as much if not more than you do.

"This sentiment is what a lot of people condemning those looking at pay miss, that this is entirely a privilege others don't have. When you come from an a third world country for instance, lifestyle is not your priority its just simply living."

Couldn't agree more. I realise that I am very privileged to be in this position. Also we don't live in London so we aren't slaughtered by house prices/rents and stupidly sized mortgages.

Madam I don't know how to distill it into a few words. Once away from poverty I don't think money actually makes a difference to happiness. My work flexibility (I own my own business) allows me to volunteer with people in very difficult situations. The things that people need are a stable place to live, friends, family, food and health care. If you have those, there isn't much else you need.

Oy vey!

OhYou - First of all, the two aren't mutually exclusive i.e studying for a good paying degree and happiness. No one is saying people should study for a degree they hate and sink into the abyss of depression simply because it pays shitloads!

Secondly, money isn't everything but surely makes a difference. There are certainly shouts of joy when ones children climb the property ladder. .

Thirdly, you seem rather subconsciously blaise about your financial position as in My work flexibility (I own my own business) allows me to volunteer with people in very difficult situations. Many will kill for that!
.
Last but not the least, how do you know the parents on here talking about degrees that lead to good paying jobs aren't from a cycle of poverty? I know there's this assumption that everyone here is white middle, that really isn't the case.

My point is, many do not have the privilege of parents paying thousands for their kids to go and study mickey mouse degrees, simply because it makes them happy. We look for a balance, a range of degrees/an industry that will lead to a good paying job (hopefully) and then, which one of them would they be happiest doing.

ermm, you asked me a question. I answered it. You seem to like to take things to extremes. You have no idea about me, my background or why I can't work full time. You are the one making assumptions right now.

Please pick a fight with someone else, I'm too ill for this shit.

Oh no. Get well soon OhYouBadKitten

A first class arts from oxbridge still had value but a second class oxbridge arts degree isn't useful unless you are planing to be one a teacher in the subject you took there.

I'm still reeling from discovering my 2:1 from Oxford for an arts degree is useless! I really should have mentioned that to my employers at interview.

For me, the 'value' of having an arts degree from Oxford is that it demonstrates to potential employers that you are comfortable processing a lot of new information and distilling it into a coherent argument, which can be useful in a work environment. It (theoretically, I'll ignore the outliers) demonstrates a bit of resilience, diligence and dedication, traits which many employers are keen on. You also tend to develop some confidence as well, having to defend your work in front of experts in the field, which, again, is useful in a work environment.

If you are a parent, it is natural to worry that your child is taking risks by not pursuing a degree that lends itself to an obvious profession. But, ultimately, it doesn't feel contentious to say you'd rather they be happy studying something they enjoy that may lead somewhere, may lead nowhere, rather than applying themselves to something that is not making them happy, but will lead to clear career goals. Actually, reading that back, maybe that is contentious. I'm probably speaking for myself. Happiness above all.

My point is, many do not have the privilege of parents paying thousands for their kids to go and study mickey mouse degrees, simply because it makes them happy. We look for a balance, a range of degrees/an industry that will lead to a good paying job (hopefully) and then, which one of them would they be happiest doing.

I see my previous paragraph was in fact contentious. I'll let it stand, all the same.

OhYou - I haven't made any assumptions about you apart from what you yourself said about your work flexibility and owning your own business.

I have not said anything about wether you work full time or not so you made that up yourself.

I hope you get well soon.