Shift towards STEM and vocational degrees

[ErrolTheDragon]

I thought some here might be interested in this report from yesterday's Times, and today's leader column with a very positive response to it.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/university-students-ditch-arts-degrees-and-opt-for-medicine-w63vnzrxd?shareToken=6e46a444cbf4ad46435a1154c599e20a

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-changing-trends-in-higher-education-two-cultures-bzzlfbjzd?shareToken=66db880492335958414064160e810114

My take on it is that it's probably to some extent an overdue rebalancing following a rise in arts subjects in former polys versus their original more technical/vocational focus. And there's more easily accessible data on employment prospects and salaries, which coupled with tuition fees doubtless informs students decisions.

Although the UK has some of the best scientists on the planet as the pandemic shows so I am not so sure were are lacking in that department.

@Jaxhog

Really good news. STEM is our future, whether we like it or not. And you don't have to be a brilliant technologist or coder in STEM these days. Up to now, it hasn't been the sexiest choice, so it's good to see this changing.

I'm a STEM Ambassador and spend time trying to convince students in schools (especially girls) that a STEM career can be huge fun and very varied.

I wish they had this in our school! How can you find out about careers if your school isn’t forward thinking?!

I just don't get the ridiculous push towards STEM - it ends up bashing a lot of round pegs into square holes.

What would be the point of that? The shift to interesting but unemployable degrees hasn't exactly served a generation well. I expect about a 5-10% shift to STEM in degrees and vocational qualifications would solve the skills shortage. This could be achieved from the pool of young people who would suit STEM occupations but suffer peer pressure or bad careers advice and don't even consider it. The arts and humanities won't suffer they will just be less oversupplied.

I'll allow geography though, very relevant and closely allied to earth sciences.

We certainly need to improve the T and the E in schools. That would inspire the more academic pupils into the design/tech end of things and also inspire the more manual/physical kind of pupil into the trades and more manual engineering.

I couldn't believe how poor the "tech" teaching was at my son's school over the last few years. It was literally just as crap as mine was back in the late 70s. Spend a term making a wooden fish. Next term making a metal trowel. No real "teaching" as such. The kids with an uncle or a grandparent with a workshop in their shed did well. Those who relied on the teacher did poorly.

My son's school had a tech computer suite (for cad drawing etc) and a room with high-tec equipment, such as a 3d printer, laser cutter, computerised router, but they were never allowed into it, not even at GCSE level. It was galling because at the open day, they had it all on display and working, to suck pupils in but they never got to use any of it.

I just don't get the ridiculous push towards STEM - it ends up bashing a lot of round pegs into square holes.

STEM has a very wide scope - it's only "round pegs into square holes" if the student has gone into the wrong area of it (usually because of bad career "advice"). Just take engineering - so many routes in, some apprentice routes, some degree routes, some professional routes, for all the different disciplines and jobs within engineering. There's literally a job for everyone.

Same with Maths - I don't think people realise how many different "Maths" degrees that there are and the amazing choice of optional modules within a "maths" degree.

• We certainly need to improve the T and the E in schools. That would inspire the more academic pupils into the design/tech end of things and also inspire the more manual/physical kind of pupil into the trades and more manual engineering.

It's such a shame that these subjects - along with the 'creative' skill fields such as music - have been more or less squeezed out in the last few years. My DD got in under the wire as it were (shes a 4th year student now) and was able to do 12 GCSEs - an EBAcc 'academic' set plus drama, computer science and Electronic Products. The latter crystallised the interest that had begun in ks3 tech lessons. The (girls') school had - and used - laser cutters, etching facilities for the electronics etc.
Some of her cohort did all the 'creative arts' - music, drama, art. Many did Design tech. They certainly weren't all hammered into STEM holes.

I think it's the explosion of poor-quality arts/humanities degrees from the lower-ranking universities which has been the problem over the last decade - not arts/humanities per see.

I've worked in industries (medical/ financial) which typically have a high level of STEM graduates and a lot of them are terrible people managers and team players! Sometimes people with a humanities background are much better at the communication side of things, and of course there are industries like advertising and PR where a degree in literature or languages is highly valued.

I was a good all-rounder at school and had varied A levels. I was heavily pushed into studying a STEM subject at uni by both my Head of Sixth and my father. It was the worst decision of my life and I ended up coming out with a 2:2. Years later I went back to uni via distance learning to study the subject I wish I'd taken first time around.

“Better to do a math , computer science, medical degree and grad to 30k salary then doing history or arts degrees and grading to 18k salary working retail because there are no jobs for your degree (which you never bothered to research)“

History is useful in lots of areas. Politics and the civil service, teaching, heritage and conservation, archiving, law, marketing.

I'd also push back against the suggestion that something like PPE is a useless degree. There is a lot of maths and statistics in Economics, and a good economist should be able to understand research, data analysis etc to a good level. People dismiss a subject such as Philosophy as irrelevant too, but having sat through a presentation at Oxford about why they combine it with Computer Science to produce a Computer Science and Ethics course it really opened my eyes to its importance in decision-making.

Lots to think about on this thread.

The expansion of the university sector lead to degrees being offered that didn’t stack up academically with those offered by the more well established universities. By and large, I would not have included the colleges of higher education or the teacher training colleges in the university sector. Their courses, where necessary, could have transferred to the universities instead of them expanding beyond all recognition. Their is little evidence their degrees add much to life time earnings when compared to the same degrees elsewhere.

FE stands alone as a provider of lower level courses for the non A level DCs. They do provide a vital stepping stone though for 16 year olds and adults alike.

The HE colleges were formerly work qualification led. The one near me was a leader in furniture design. Also numerous business and post grad professional qualifications were taught there. If didn’t need to offer first degrees, but it’s now a university and it does. Near the bottom of any league table you look at. So why anyone would go there for an academic subject is beyond me! It should revert to HE and support apprenticeships - like it used to pre 1992.

It’s not possible to make dc that are not keen on sciences do them. Any more than DC can be forced to be good at languages. High achieving DC should feel free to study what they want at university but there should be a cull of subjects.

We do need a variety of skills. In fact some of the worst decisions are made when a variety of skills are not present. Many think the banking crash would not have been so bad if economists had taken a back seat earlier. Common sense and other skills might have been more useful. As indeed it would be in tandem with many scientific roles.

History grads from the best universities do well enough. Some scientists don’t do as well as others. We do need a mix but as DH recruits engineers, he’s rather tired of seeing young people who think using a computer absolves them from actually thinking about solutions and being creative! They might even need to speak to clients so personality and presentation skills are important. Not just computer skills.

I have a history degree and have never had any trouble getting jobs. I went to a good university and spent 3 years learning how to find, sift for reliability and absorb huge amounts of information quickly and then argue about it. That's useful in all sorts of jobs and is transferable between fields.

I work with a STEM graduate who automatically believes the last thing he was told on a subject, no critical analysis of who is telling him, whether they might be wrong or spinning the facts to get their own way, does that thing actually sound likely, nothing. You could tell him the sky is green and that would be the basis of his next decision. His technical knowledge of his area is fine but you need "soft skills" too to balance him out. And if you're thinking long term, his numerical skills will be automated long, long before AI is able to hold meetings with non-technical clients and translate what they want into something they can actually have.

I am too thick to understand - STEM is science, technology, engineering and maths.

What careers for example does a straight science degree lead to?

Apart from the financial sector - what employment would a maths degree lead to that a History degree cannot?

My son would have been able to do STEM subjects at AL - and hated every minute of it. However as at the moment he plans on converting to law afterwards, I know his subject choice at Uni doesn't matter

I do think though our generation is not very good at careers advise as we are not aware of all the possible careers - however we need all kids of skills in the world - so why would a student who genuinely wouldn't enjoy STEM subjects, do a STEM degree at Uni?

@raspberrymuffin

I have a history degree and have never had any trouble getting jobs. I went to a good university and spent 3 years learning how to find, sift for reliability and absorb huge amounts of information quickly and then argue about it. That's useful in all sorts of jobs and is transferable between fields.

I work with a STEM graduate who automatically believes the last thing he was told on a subject, no critical analysis of who is telling him, whether they might be wrong or spinning the facts to get their own way, does that thing actually sound likely, nothing. You could tell him the sky is green and that would be the basis of his next decision. His technical knowledge of his area is fine but you need "soft skills" too to balance him out. And if you're thinking long term, his numerical skills will be automated long, long before AI is able to hold meetings with non-technical clients and translate what they want into something they can actually have.

Sure but is it not possible that you're just smarter than him? Why is it just his degree over yours?

Do you really think if you did a STEM degree instead you wouldn't be able to critically analyze information ?

@chopc

I am too thick to understand - STEM is science, technology, engineering and maths.

What careers for example does a straight science degree lead to?

Apart from the financial sector - what employment would a maths degree lead to that a History degree cannot?

My son would have been able to do STEM subjects at AL - and hated every minute of it. However as at the moment he plans on converting to law afterwards, I know his subject choice at Uni doesn't matter

I do think though our generation is not very good at careers advise as we are not aware of all the possible careers - however we need all kids of skills in the world - so why would a student who genuinely wouldn't enjoy STEM subjects, do a STEM degree at Uni?

Maths degree is one of the most in demand and highest paying degrees.

Finance is an extremely high paying career path and math is extremely high in demand.

Programming/analytics/data science all are very high paying and maths is a very good background for them.

Honestly with some good career choices a math grad is 5 years to 100k a year job, no joke.

As is law after a law degree degree - except it is an extra year to qualify but you are paid over £40k a year in your 2 years of training before that and then potentially can earn hundreds of thousands. We used to hire as lawyers once they qualified some people with a Phd in some areas like biotech as they had got so fed up with how low the pay could be in the UK in science compared with law.

I think we can all probably agree better o the point that if the top 20% or 15% only went to university and the rest started work at 18 as happened when I went to university then the issue would be solved- no student debt for most and getting all that work experience from age 18 (or age 16) rather than a degree which from some places is not very useful. That is probably more the problem than that arts v sciences are in a battle.

You make a good point @Xenia . And I hope you don't mind but I will definitely be asking you about the career pathway to law as time goes on given your wealth of experience of being a lawyer and having three DC's follow your footsteps ☺️

@Pebbles574

I'd also push back against the suggestion that something like PPE is a useless degree. There is a lot of maths and statistics in Economics, and a good economist should be able to understand research, data analysis etc to a good level. People dismiss a subject such as Philosophy as irrelevant too, but having sat through a presentation at Oxford about why they combine it with Computer Science to produce a Computer Science and Ethics course it really opened my eyes to its importance in decision-making.

DS has never swayed from his Y2 goal of being an, 'ethical hacker,' but didn't realise there was a Computer Science and Ethics course.

How brilliant!

But all this focus on "5 years to a £100k job" is so depressing. Yes, we need young people to pursue careers which will allow them to support themselves, but what about career satisfaction, happiness, interest and sense of achievement etc?
I have seen this in my DSs school - lots of high achieving parents all pushing their children towards STEM degrees, and follow them in medicine, dentistry, engineering etc. Some of them are really just not going to be happy/ well suited to these.

One of my DSs is doing a STEM subject at uni and it's completely right for him, and I am sure he will do well. The other DS is dyslexic, highly creative, but his brain simply does not work in the linear, logical way required for a lot of STEM work. He is pursuing a creative arts subject, which yes, might mean he will earn less than his brother, but it is what will make him feel fulfilled in life.

Strangely, amongst our friends there are lots of couples where one is STEM/ the other Arts/Humanities. Maybe that is the solution - choose a higher paid spouse?!

I agree on the whole that the arts has become rather bloated as regards to Uni Courses. I speak as someone who did an arts degree which was quite specialist and out of 30 only 2 carried it on post degree.
I know that we produce more photography graduates every year than work in the whole of Europe, and sometimes I feel the courses 'sell a dream' to students who come out with enormous debts.
Take the explosion in courses studying rock & pop music since the 90's for instance, I can honestly say I don't think there has been any improvement in British bands since their introduction as far as I can see.

@Pebbles574

But all this focus on "5 years to a £100k job" is so depressing. Yes, we need young people to pursue careers which will allow them to support themselves, but what about career satisfaction, happiness, interest and sense of achievement etc? I have seen this in my DSs school - lots of high achieving parents all pushing their children towards STEM degrees, and follow them in medicine, dentistry, engineering etc. Some of them are really just not going to be happy/ well suited to these.

One of my DSs is doing a STEM subject at uni and it's completely right for him, and I am sure he will do well. The other DS is dyslexic, highly creative, but his brain simply does not work in the linear, logical way required for a lot of STEM work. He is pursuing a creative arts subject, which yes, might mean he will earn less than his brother, but it is what will make him feel fulfilled in life.

Strangely, amongst our friends there are lots of couples where one is STEM/ the other Arts/Humanities. Maybe that is the solution - choose a higher paid spouse?!

This is all part of the poverty trap/cycle though.

Working class families just want their kids to be happy so they let them go down these low paying career paths without any guidance.

I think it's much more depressing to get stuck in this poverty cycle.

@Xoxoxoxoxoxox I have seen the most bizarre degrees being discussed in various platforms. However university is not all about getting a top paying job. Not everyone can - if they did there wouldn't be any too paying job - instead a lot of Middle paying jobs (which I am fully supportive of).

Going through university teaches a lot of life skills as well and those who only gets a low paying career at the end of it - will probably never repay their debt (a discussion for another thread maybe)

@Jsnn why careers advise should happen as part of baby school or university curriculum and not optional ........

Also students need something to aspire to

Having said all this - we do need some unskilled workforce as well. So if all DC are encouraged to go for high paying jobs, who do you think will do the traditionally poorly paid jobs eg supermarket worker, bin collector, post person, delivery people etc

I've skipped through a bit but if encouraging young people into STEM is partly done through the message of prospects and pay, I fear many will be disappointed. If it is for the love of innovation and science, fine. But I read somewhere very recently that some of the lowest pay for graduates (especially female ... hmmm) after 5 years is in the science sector.

I think that may be why a lot of science grads after 10 years or so end up -sometimes reluctantly and ill advisedly!- in teaching.

@Piggywaspushed

I've skipped through a bit but if encouraging young people into STEM is partly done through the message of prospects and pay, I fear many will be disappointed. If it is for the love of innovation and science, fine. But I read somewhere very recently that some of the lowest pay for graduates (especially female ... hmmm) after 5 years is in the science sector.

I think that may be why a lot of science grads after 10 years or so end up -sometimes reluctantly and ill advisedly!- in teaching.

Do you have the source for that? I really don't think that's true

It definitely is and it is recent.

I think it was in the middle of a huge document which did do the rounds on MN a while ago so one of these official things/ Possibly HEPI or Sutton Trust.

It was in the press too because it generated interest as it was gendered. Will see if I can find it.

Essentially I believe it said biology graduates may well end up as lab technicians. Which is fine but probably wasn't the aspiration.