Should universities give clearer information on degree career routes and prospects?

[LyndallMay]

Parents of university students or applicants, would you have wanted to know this before they chose their degree?
I have started a UK Parliament petition asking universities to give prospective students clearer information before they enrol or become financially committed.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776439
Require universities to explain degree career routes and job prospects
The petition asks for students to be told about the full career route connected with a degree, including what the degree does and does not qualify them to do, any further training, examinations, professional requirements, work experience, time and costs.
It also asks for clear and recent information about realistic graduate employment prospects, including where entry level roles may require previous experience.
This is not about guaranteeing anybody a job or discouraging people from university. It is about giving students the full picture while they still have a genuine choice about their degree and career route.
If you agree, I would be very grateful if you would sign and share it.
IMPORTANT: After signing, please check your email and click the confirmation link sent by UK Parliament. Otherwise your signature will not be recorded.

@worstofbothworlds Well not as a prediction but some employment info is poor. I do think if offering a law degree, a uni could try and survey grads as to whether they now work as a trainee solicitor, barrister, a paralegal or in a law dept for local government or have no job in law at all. For some courses the stats would be quite shocking so what’s the incentive for the universities to make much effort to tell prospective students anything? We all know most doctors get jobs in medicine, but architects, engineers, lawyers? What’s their % of success?

I am pretty sure that info is available. Even 30 years ago the stats were that 2/3 of law grads don't go into Law. I have read that architecture and graphic design is collapsing due to AI. That has been over the past 2 years, so information given by Universities 4-5 years before is completely out of date by graduation. Far better for the student to look for information for themselves so they can tailor it to their own ambitions and know whether they want to do the degree anyway.

For some degrees, the numbers who don’t continue on to a career in that subject isn’t in any way a lack of success - more that the degree equips them to be valuable in a variety of fields. The fact that engineering grads don’t all go on to be engineers isn’t because there aren’t engineering opportunities available, it’s that they can get higher paying roles in finance etc.
But this info is already available.

All of this information is available so I’m not sure why you don’t think it is.

Are you suggesting universities carry out an additional survey to find out information which is already available? Who would resource this? Who would be responsible for collecting and analysing this data?

At some point we have to expect prospective students to take some responsibility for their own research and to not assume that the university course page is the only source of information they should consult.

Universities have to be careful what they publish on their website and in the prospectus. We have to ensure at all information is factually correct and complies with CMA requirements. We can publish the Graduate Outcome data because that is factual data which is collected by an independent third party. You can compare the data across the sector.

Every year there is a report published called ‘what do graduates do’ which gives a subject level overview. It tells you the percentages of graduates who are employed, in further study, unemployed etc.

The best thing a prospective student can do is speak to a course leader. They will be able to talk them through the types of jobs graduates have accessed and can discuss how the course prepares them for employment.
But it’s also important to understand that nothing is guaranteed - just because a huge number of graduates entered a particular sector one year doesn’t mean that will happen every year.

@ErrolTheDragon Well yes and maybe that should be said. I remember you arguing with me that engineering grads didn’t do that though! They plainly do. All careers info is good but the particular issue with some subjects is that dc are absolutely not getting better paid jobs! You are only seeing elite uni grads too from Cambridge. There are engineering grads who are not that great! Architecture is notoriously fickle in terms of who actually gets to be a chartered architect. Excessive uni places for many professions is causing problems.

I learned plenty of skills, but none of my employers were interested in the fact I had a degree,they were interested in attitude and experience, nothing more. Which specific wider data are you referring to?- all that has been mentioned is the slightly higher graduate employment figures.
My point was being so in debt for a slightly higher chance of employment might not be a good investment- if you can't see that then I think your own education was somewhat deficient.
Higher education is now a huge commercial business with thousands of people employed within it- being drawn into the idea a degree will enable a far better career is marketing PR as much as anything else.
You need to try an engage some critical thinking and realise that it is not as simple as degree success, no degree failure.

We all know most doctors get jobs in medicine, but architects, engineers, lawyers? What’s their % of success?

Quite a high percentage of engineering graduates willingly move on to extremely well paid careers in finance. Should that be regarded as success or failure?

This is such a rude post. If someone disagree with you that doesn’t make them uneducated or lacking in critical thought.

What data would you like? There is an awful lot out there so you need to be specific.

If none of your employers were interested in the skills you developed as part of your degree then you are very much an outlier. The Institute of Student Employers publish information on the skills graduate employers are looking for. These are very much the wider skills we expect students to develop as part of their degree.
I also work with 100’s of graduate employers who are definitely in line with the ISE’s report.

Seeing as though you are so steadfast in your opinion can you please provide data that a degree doesn’t improve career prospects. I’m talking at a societal level here, not anecdotes relating to your personal experience. You need a much wider dataset fit it to be meaningful!

My post is not rude, you have repeatedly ignored what
I have been saying, so calling your comprehension into question is legitimate.
You telling me I learned no useful skills at university, now that was rude, you shouldn't dish it out if you can't take criticism.
You obviously have skin in this game, I am merely saying the cost of a degree has to be weighted against it's potential usefulness, many students with degrees never see an improvement in their prospects because they have a degree- instead of obssessing about statistics try a ctually talking to some recent graduates.

My post is not rude, you have repeatedly ignored what
I have been saying, so calling your comprehension into question is legitimate.
You telling me I learned no useful skills at university, now that was rude, you shouldn't dish it out if you can't take criticism.
You obviously have skin in this game, I am merely saying the cost of a degree has to be weighted against it's potential usefulness, many students with degrees never see an improvement in their prospects because they have a degree- instead of obssessing about statistics try a ctually talking to some recent graduates.

The post I just called rude wasn’t even aimed at me. I just thought your rudeness needed calling out.
Perhaps it’s your comprehension that needs some work?

I also commented because I’m a university academic and happen to specialise in career development so this is literally my area of expertise. I’m happy to provide data to support my claims if you want to tell me what you specifically want to see?
Can you do the same for your claims?

Oh and @Laurmolonlabe I do speak to recent graduates all the time as well as working with 100’s of graduate employers.

Then maybe you should do that since, you are actually paid by the system you are advocating.
I was speaking from personal experience, and as such I have no need to present credenitials for that, no one on MN does that- so why are you asking?
I have been no more rude than you have, so perhaps, as this is your actual profession you should be a little more professional.

Please point out where I have been rude to you?
You called another poster lacking in education and critical thinking just because they disagreed with you.

You are suggesting that your personal experience is representative when I (and others) have said that the data for graduates more generally suggests something different. That’s not being rude, that’s just common sense.

Again, if you tell me what specific data you want to see then I’ll signpost you to it. But you need to be specific as there is a significant amount of research and data available.

So no data then.
I have never said my experience is representative- it is my experience, but dismissing it because that is convenient to your argument is not "common sense", and not actually coming up with data to support your very sweeping arguments, plus hedging with "data more generally suggests" does not instill confidence that even you believe these arguments.

Yes there is data. Shit loads of it. I’m asking what data you want to see! If you tell me then I will send you a link to that data. This is a very well researched area with thousands of different data sets. What do you want me to provide data on?

To be honest, you'd need some kind of data.Analyst, to look retrospectively, at the last career destinations of people who had done every single degree.Imaginable to see where they ended up and in what employment.

Not every graduate would bother to fill in the forms so it's always going to be skewed.

Then, you'd have to success that this data is still going to be current in a very different economic and political climate a few years later.

It's just hopeless. I would say just to apply basic common sense if you get into do a traditional subject at a well-known top university ,you're probably going to have better career outlets than doing communication studies at a third rate ex poly. The amount of money spent on a degree like that could be better spent.

It’s my job to analyse this data. And then use it to improve the employability prospects of the students in my faculty.

Graduate Outcomes is the national survey and this is administered by HESA not the universities. Yes, the response rate isn’t 100%(and never will be) but it’s still within the threshold of being able to draw meaningful conclusions about graduate employment rates.
This survey also looks at whether students think their degree is useful in the current career and whether it is likely to be useful for their career plan. This is very useful data to have.

We can also look at LEO data for more long term information. Then you’ve got experts such as Charlie Ball who analyse sector wide data along with labour market trends and share that with universities and career development professionals.

There also reports looking at these issues from slightly different angles such as IFS, OECD, ISE and sector professional bodies.

So in other words, this is already in hand, most university do it and government petitions aren't needed.

Edit, to say it sounds like a very interesting job.

Indeed!
We can’t map out ‘full career routes’ for every degree like the OP is requesting because there are too many options and variables. We also have to be very careful as to what we promise as a university!

But we can look at previous destinations and ‘future scan’ using information from the ISE and sector professional bodies to ensure that our degrees are preparing students for the labour market BUT we can’t predict the future and all it takes is a global pandemic/war/recession/change of government to fuck things up!

What we do know is that, on average, unemployment rates are lower amongst graduates compared to non-graduates. We also know that the majority of graduates feel their degree gave them the skills they needed for their career and that around 80% of graduate jobs don’t specify a degree subject. These employers are more interested in the skills developed.

It is a great job - it’s never boring!

Thinking about it, I think what would be better would be to say what you can't do with a particular degree, and that should be made clear before committing to a course. So for example, if some degrees are ' qualifying' degrees and exempt you from some elements of further study like as people have said, architecture degrees, psychology and I think some Law degrees etc then if your are offering architecture but not as a qualifying degree that should be stated clearly but to try and map every possible career for every single degree is impossible.

Well…. They should say if you can’t do something with a particular degree which you might reasonably expect it to enable you to do on the basis of the prospectus.

Universities will make it very clear if a course includes professional accreditation but they can’t really produce a list of careers the course doesn’t qualify you to
do. There are multiple routes into most careers and a course without professional accreditation could be someone’s first step towards that career.

For example, you can have a BA (hons) Primary Education with QTS which qualifies you to work as a teacher. A university might also offer a BA (hons) Primary Studies (non QTS) which does not qualify you to teach but is often a stepping stone to a PGCE. So you could still become a teacher with this qualification, you just need additional training. Plus, outside of the UK you might not need QTS so the one without it could be enough. There are just too many variables.

As long as you are clear which one comes with professional accreditation and which one doesn’t you, shouldn’t also need a list of careers the course doesn’t qualify you to do.

Prospective students should work backwards from the employers or professional body. What are they asking for? Then find the appropriate course and check with the employer/body and university if unsure.

I understand the need for transparency but people should also be expected to do their own full and thorough research. It’s impossible for a university to cater to students career ideas on personalised level through their course information.

I wouldn’t particularly expect someone with a law degree to become a lawyer, no more than I would expect someone with a history degree to become a historian, etc. It’s a general degree training logical thinking, fact checking, interpretation and persuasive argument, etc, like many others.

Yes because a law degree isn't enough to qualify as a solicitor or barrister, you need graduate courses.

It would be weird for someone to do a medical degree and never practise as a doctor as that is a specific training degree.