Some universities will go bust thread 2

[GinForBreakfast]

Continuing as thread 1 has filled up.

@TizerorFizz I didn't say it was all about men! Just that some of the research quoted did exclude female data, but wasn't upfront about it. My main point was that a university education (or any education for that matter) doesn't always trump social and economic background. In the same way that (sadly) disability and ethnicity affects outcomes.

Universities are of course interested in their own survival but I like to think that academics and educators also truly believe in the transformational power of education. I do. I'm currently a student (while working ft) and my experience has been brilliant, it has given me opportunities that I could not get any other way.

Yes, things need to change and be better but let's not forget to preserve and celebrate the good stuff.

They just do not think it is the job of their kids to fund anything more than the teaching element? That is were the conflict is arising.

So no careers, well being, student support etc?

@GinForBreakfast I wholeheartedly agree with education transforming outcomes for students. Research without women included feels a bit pointless. IFS doesn’t do this and the different outcomes are valuable.

However there must be recognition as to who is paying. Less dc are being born. Universities will be increasingly short of well qualified dc so do they just take the money from those who enjoy dubious benefits which are difficult to quantify? Do they take the money to boost their standing in their community? Is that fair? Or should they offer more courses below degree level and engage far more with local dc and employers? Some lower tariff universities should absolutely do this and other countries understand this.

We already know there’s a huge anti university fee increase argument. By universities saying they exist for DC to explore what they want to without needing to think about employment flies in the face of what many who pay actually want. I think it can also lead to poor decisions on which degree is taken but that’s another matter. However universities must recognise the cost to parents, the government and students themselves and thinking education at university trumps all and jobs do not matter is wrong. Many dc do expect a better job and therefore I strongly believe in transformation is via learning and work, not just learning. Many do want to save for housing and be an independent member of society. Too many degrees are not focussed on student outcomes in terms of work. It’s not right to think resulting work doesn’t matter.

Too many degrees are not focussed on student outcomes in terms of work. It’s not right to think resulting work doesn’t matter.

This just isn't true. Graduate Outcomes is a focus for ALL courses. What you need to understand though, is that a course doesn't have to train you for a very specific job to be useful in getting you a graduate job.
The UK labour market doesn't work like that.

@ElaineMBenes As DD1 did MFL I do understand that. However there are many degrees which are not particularly academic and there are not graduate jobs for these young people. I think parents do value various services offered at a university but that doesn’t mean they are all high quality!

Fair enough, thats partly why I asked about the US. DD2 did her Masters at an institution which doesn't appear in rankings tables because it doesn't offer undergraduate degrees. Nevertheless anyone in her field is well aware of its global reputation, it doesn't require endorsement from QS.

More than half her cohort were overseas students, indeed that was part of its attraction for her, and a lot were fully qualified junior doctors looking to it as a specialism. But they were Europeans and, for some reason, South Africans rather than Americans or Chinese.

I think parents do value various services offered at a university but that doesn’t mean they are all high quality!

This is going to become more of an issue going forward unfortunately as professional services teams are stripped to the bone. it's a sad state of affairs.

I agree @TizerorFizz and you can see already how universities are diversifying to take into account changing demographics. No university that sticks to the current model of full time UG/PG and research will survive.

The general public has very little understanding of who pays for HE. They think it's the individual student through their loan (hence the antipathy towards higher fees), they don't realise that the taxpayer is footing the bill for the loans not repaid.

@GinForBreakfast There’s a large amount of obscuring the facts all round. Whether any university likes it or not, the students going there are mostly not worried about QS rankings or the boosting of the university’s standing abroad. Yet they pay for this. What they often get are obscure info about a course and what it might lead to. Parents tend to think teaching matters and hence look for gold award teaching. I know many who have taken this at face value and been utterly distraught at £9,350 for 6 hours a week teaching. It’s inevitable I’m afraid. Plenty of parents and students are worried about getting a job because they believed a degree would help with this and then find it’s unbelievably difficult.

@TizerorFizz when you say students get obscure information about courses what do you think is missing?
Universities have an obligation to provide detailed information on modules, contact time, assessments etc. What is missing?

As for plenty students finding it 'unbelievably difficult' to get jobs. That's a pretty big exaggeration I'm afraid and it just not supported by the data. There is a huge amount of support available for students should they choose to access it and many universities offer careers advice for a period of time after graduation (some for life).

As for your issue with rankings....well again, this comes down to the function and purpose of a university. You and potential students need to understand that a university has more than one function and a number of different priorities. many of us working in HE would suggest tat these competing priorities compliment each other and make for a better student experience overall. But that requires you to see the bigger picture. .

@ElaineMBenes You said earlier lots of students don’t complete employment data for you. Therefore you simply don’t know what the majority are doing. I have used the word “plenty” because I have seen various attempts at quantifying the percentage not employed in graduate roles or not at all. It’s not 2% is it? More like 20%. However without accurate data you cannot tell prospective students accurate destinations after a particular degree. It’s now 15 months after isn’t it? Wasn’t it 9 months? That automatically makes me feel info (such as it is) is being manipulated. I would much prefer 9 months and 2 years. Students really get poor info about employment stats. Plenty of ordinary people simply don’t look at IFS data as they don’t know it exists. There are loads of courses with under 66% in grad employment. Are they good value for money? Other than keeping staff employed?

Prospective students also get really poor info on who gets placements and how they get them. Just look at the other thread to see how what is “promised” (marketed) and how difficult it really is. Marketing a uni course doesn’t need to be accurate.

Where does any course trumpet “you will get 6 hours of teaching”? So setting you a challenge! How easy is it to find teaching hours? Sheffield University Politics BA for example. What’s the teaching hours on modules? I totally agree not all learning is via teaching but what is expected? How do students find out?

This then leads into why some choose to do a degree. Without accurate data, how does any careers adviser know which courses should lead to social mobility? And conversely which might not. Which university degrees are better and at which university? I remember my DN said teachers recommended a science degree due to “lots of well paid jobs” in that field. Better than their pay apparently. Except there are not (DN could not get one) and it’s largely untrue about pay except for a tiny minority much further on in their careers.

Why can students not make decisions based on accurate info? I don’t buy a car based on assertions. I look at accurate reviews and data.

Why can students not make decisions based on accurate info? I don’t buy a car based on assertions. I look at accurate reviews and data.

Choosing whether to go to university, what university to go to and what degree to study is a very different decision to buying a car. Behavioural economics shows that people are generally not very good at making optimal decisions in one-off, complex and significant situations. So many students rely on "vibe" when they choose a university 😄

Back to what I said upthread. Each prospective student needs to make a choice based on their personal circumstances, risks, ambitions etc.

@GinForBreakfast I think they have been pushed and cajoled into making decisions based on marketing from universities. More and more students are definitely looking for value for money. If they are working snd parents are struggling to help, surely outcomes in the job market matter?

I think RG is a shorthand for quality at the elite end and is obviously mentioned by schools. I do think students can wade though some info, but it’s not all accurate or easy to find. The reviews on a car are probably a lot more truthful and much easier to access! Obviously not the same but reviewers tend to come to similar conclusions. In HE no one really reviews anything in an easy to read format. It’s the same money as buying a car by the way - probably more. So why do students put up with questionable info about what they are buying (with mostly our money?). It’s too difficult and how do they know what or where meets their ambitions? DN was lied to.

My university guarantees 12 hours minimum face to face teaching per week in the first year. Some disciplines offer many more hours.

I design modules which require 2-4 hours of independent study (mostly required reading) per hour of class time. University is not school.

It’s interesting that I never hear outrage about the Oxford tutorial system which offers 1 or 2 hours per week, plus lectures - generally non-compulsory ( in the Humanities at least) although recommended.

The analogy with a car doesn’t really work, does it? We don’t tend to consider how they are driven by other people when we pick cars. There are all kinds of reasons why a student may not secure a graduate job, not all of them down to the university. A young relative did a masters degree and then applied for (and got) an apprenticeship that they were attracted to entirely because it involved not having to talk to people. I imagine the person in their former department who gets the flack for its Graduate Outcomes was not delighted. We’re expected to accommodate students’ inability / refusal to give presentations, contribute to group discussion, even turn up to class - all kinds of things that are generally required of a professional in the workplace. How do we imagine this is going to turn out?

Oh, and my department’s absolutely brilliant careers consultant is pulling her hair out because no matter how much chasing she does of the cohort or individuals, or however many events she organises, the vast majority of our students won’t engage. When they do work with her, there is a pretty much 100% success rate of getting into the field that they’re targeting. The Graduate Outcomes survey doesn’t reflect that statistic.

i understand your frustration @GCAcademic We practically bribe our undergrads to attend employment events. Until they panic in their final term and then tell us we don’t do anything.

Not all of them, of course. But enough to make you wonder …

Oh, we have actually bribed them to attend careers events for years. With pizza and wine. As of this year, we're not allowed to spend a penny on catering, so we're scratching our collective heads to work out a different strategy.

Degree apprenticeships are a bright spot. I live in London and they are more competitive than most uni places. Parents and young people like the idea of no debt, some pay, work experience, and a degree.

There just aren’t enough of them to go around, and not every young person lives in a big city where they can access high quality job training while living at home.

The traditional idea of going away to uni and studying something theoretical no longer pays students back, because it has been democratised. Perhaps it’s value was always more elite signalling rather than inherent. Now that it’s no longer an elite signal, there isn’t much value while student debt has ballooned.

That's an interesting take re the "elite signalling", Empress (and I'm not being sarky, I hadn't thought about that angle before).

Elite signalling seems to be going to the US for uni now. Or anywhere international, for that matter, seeing that it has become so difficult. The hypocrisy of attracting thousands of international students but not facilitating the same for our own, really annoys me. That is of course the Governments fault. In this day and age of international work spaces, it seems only fair to allow our own students to have similar cultural experiences, that we facilitate for the rest of the world.

@Araminta1003 Turing money is often means tested. Many students get little help. As usual we are so insular!

@EmpressoftheMundane The last time I looked, around 10,000 18 year olds got onto degree apprenticeships. The vast majority go to older employees. So dc might need to get a job first and then prove themselves. It’s very difficult if you don’t live anywhere near a suitable employer. Then there’s the fierce competition. Often it’s better to try below a degree apprenticeship and work up. Inevitably university, taking 350,000 a year is the big player.

The comments about careers fairs probably shows the lack of get up and go amongst students. They are the not very employable ones! Cut them out and the numbers would look much better!

@Araminta1003 that is the fault of the British people who voted for Brexit and who encourage successive governments to enact xenophobic policies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yvj8yyyjpo

More of this kind of thing? Universities are private institutions and perhaps a bit more oomph outside the clutches of the dogma/ideology of UK politics is an actual must? In the interests, of everyone, long term.

The trouble with strikes are that surely the students who pay near to 10k a year will be avoiding all universities were strikes are planned?