Permabanned
The BBC is the most neutral source of news in the world. Name me a news source that is less bias. Anywhere. Globally.
Graduates 'could pay back double their student loans'
- Thread starter Dinomania
- Start date
The BBC is the most neutral source of news in the world. Name me a news source that is less bias. Anywhere. Globally.
Man of Honour
What you're overlooking is the extreme increase in people going to university and never ever using the education they receive. Lots of people I know went to uni at the taxpayer's cost and it will most likely never benefit the nation as you say. I think encouraging less people to go to uni is a good thing, not everyone can go, it doesn't and will never work.
Man of Honour
No. The fundamental point is there has to be some way of limiting the bull**** places in Uni that people are going on to take the **** and keep themselves out of work (and therefore not only keeping them from putting into the pot by way of taxes, but also costing money for a degree that will benefit no-one whatsoever) for another 3 or 4 years.
Biased.
Permabanned
May be anecdotal - but still ..
My mums first job was testing blood samples for diseases. She'd got a few O-levels from secondary school and that was it. There were so few people with degrees that the business had to choose people just with O-levels - without those people (at that stage) being specialised at .. er .. anything.
Since then there are lots more people with degrees and doctorates, and the industry has been able to demand that only people with doctorates in this field should perform this work. Since they made the rule, less mistakes have been made, a higher quality of work has been performed, the population has benefitted. Would you really force our businesses and out public sector to have a fundamentally WORSE workforce to hire from? Remember, if you answer yes, google isn't going to set up that massive new factorty in Basingstoke - it's going to set it up in Holland, because the people there are simply more educated.
----
The fact is you go on about rubbish courses .. but if the universities had stuck with the old system of Latin, Maths, English, and the traditional sciences (so certainly no computers) you'd be having a huge whinge about how totally useless and irrelevent degree courses are. Now your moaning that the courses are bull****. So what do you want exactly? Specialised courses or generic courses? Mkae your mind up!
Man of Honour
Whoa, firstly, what are you talking about with make your mind up? I gave you one opinion, nothing contradictory whatsoever. Given that you provided me with two options you then allow me to retort before going any further. That's the nature of a discussion. Don't decide that I can't make my mind up and then demand that I do so.
Your self-admitted anecdotal evidence doesn't make much sense. You seem to be making the assumption that people that have attended University are better placed to carry out tasks than people that haven't been to University. How does someone that has done Media Studies and Psychology ensure that they are better to test blood samples for disease?
Most of the people I knew that went to University were doing so to extend the time before they had to take a full-time job. Some because they wanted to avoid work, some because they hadn't made their mind up about what they wanted to do and some because they fancied the lifestyle. Very few went to actually learn and excel once they left.
Lastly, just because Universities need to move with the times does not mean it is either a choice of the examples you've given of 'traditional' courses or the rubbish we have today that will never benefit society. They have to be reasonable and of benefit.
Your self-admitted anecdotal evidence doesn't make much sense. You seem to be making the assumption that people that have attended University are better placed to carry out tasks than people that haven't been to University. How does someone that has done Media Studies and Psychology ensure that they are better to test blood samples for disease?
Most of the people I knew that went to University were doing so to extend the time before they had to take a full-time job. Some because they wanted to avoid work, some because they hadn't made their mind up about what they wanted to do and some because they fancied the lifestyle. Very few went to actually learn and excel once they left.
Lastly, just because Universities need to move with the times does not mean it is either a choice of the examples you've given of 'traditional' courses or the rubbish we have today that will never benefit society. They have to be reasonable and of benefit.
Permabanned
As a rule, people that have attended universities are better placed to carry out tasks they choose to do for employment than people that haven't been to university. Proof? Businesses are prepared to pay more for them!!When the government embarked on it's policy to encourage as much of the population to go to university as it could, it didn't do it for fun! It didn't do it for a laugh! It didn't do it without bothering figuring out how much it would cost! It did it because it is proven that the more educated a population is, the better output that country will have - which is essential for us to compete on the world stage bearing in mind we have a fairly shocking lack of natural resources.
We have to be better than our competition, or England will fail, and in 2 years you'll be down the pub moaning and saying 'We don't do anything good is this country any more, we don't produce anything'.
Your third paragraph is more anecdotal evidence. I don't know anyone that DIDN'T go to uni to try and improve their lot. I've never met anyone that didn't want to excel. I'm surprised you have.
A large percentage of graduates will go into a field that is in some way in the same general field as their degree. Its rare that someone at the graduating age of 23 (or whatever) suddenly think 'I know I've been interested in Computers for the last 15 years and have dedicated the last 4 years of my life to it, but I think I'll be a florist. Goodness, my degree is useless!!
40 years ago people just like you were declaring 'Computer Science' a rubbish degree not worth the paper it's written on.
20 years ago people were saying 'Business studies' was a complete wasta'time - you're either magically good at business or you're not.
Now I guess you're levelling your 'useless' accusations at something like 'Media studies' or 'Fashion studies'??
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Only if they relate to what they do as employment, which is demonstrably not always the case.
No, it didn't, it did it to bring the unemployment figures down.
Do you truly believe that simple figures of people attending Universities show that the country is getting 'better educated'?
What is the percentage?
Permabanned
Absolutely. To suggest that millions of people having 4 years extra education will not result in a better educated population is - well - kinda mad!
Do you truly believe if we stopped free schooling at the age of 12 rather than 16/18, the country would remain 'as educated'?
Whats the difference?
Soldato
ahah
Man of Honour
Something called a Curriculum
Doing crap useless degrees at University wastes time and money. It doesn't benefit anyone. If Unis stop allowing them it will be to everyone's benefit. Even the people attending them.
Permabanned
Something called a Curriculum
Doing crap useless degrees at University wastes time and money. It doesn't benefit anyone. If Unis stop allowing them it will be to everyone's benefit. Even the people attending them.
So university would be better if we invented a 'curriculum' which everyone had to learn regardless of what they wanted to do in life? lol?
Would you describe computer science as a crap, useless course? Business studies? Media studies? Marketing?
No? Well the last generation did.
Give some examples of what you are now deciding is useless ..
Last edited:
Soldato
Sunday Sport
Soldato
I think if anyone realised how insignificant it all is they wouldn't care
i owe roughly 3,500 X 6 for a 3 year degree + 1,000 overdraft.
thats a whopping 21,000 which if i pay off at £30 a month (the aprox minimum) i barely beat the interest and in 110 years i still wouldn't have paid it off. so whats the problem?
Far more serious issues to worry myself with than whether i can pay my STUDENT loan off before i die.
i owe roughly 3,500 X 6 for a 3 year degree + 1,000 overdraft.
thats a whopping 21,000 which if i pay off at £30 a month (the aprox minimum) i barely beat the interest and in 110 years i still wouldn't have paid it off. so whats the problem?
Far more serious issues to worry myself with than whether i can pay my STUDENT loan off before i die.
Man of Honour
It depends entirely on the vocation the students go into.
Media Studies would be crap for someone that goes into gardening, barwork, etc.
No, that's a stupid idea. Stop putting words into my mouth.
The Financial Times or Wall Street Journal.
Basically any newspaper that supplies news to people who have a vested interested in its accuracy.
The BBC has far too little analytical journalism and far too much sensationalism so that it can compete. As long as they keep hacks like Robert Peston on the payroll that isn't going to change. The only thing that is watchable is Click.
Not to mention an inherent left wing bias created due to state funding via taxation.
Permabanned
If you think that adding 4 years to the education of our population 'does not alter the population's educational level' surely you must think that removing 4 years of the education of our population 'does not alter the population's education level'?? Hence a 12 year old 'leave school' age ...?
Otherwise - er - does not compute!
I think you're just arguing 16/18 is the best leaving age for our population to aid for and should be encouraged more - just basically because you're used to it. Which is a bit naff!
ps. Would a 'gardening' degree be useful for someone going into gardening? You still haven't given your examples of 'bull****' courses that should be scrapped. Do you have any examples?
Last edited:
You appear to be presenting a viewpoint of all time spent in education is beneficial, irrespective of what is being taught, how in demand those skills are and so on.
Not all 'education' is equally valuable, even in the same subjects taught at different locations...
Permabanned
No, I am saying from an entire populations point of view - having more education will in general lead to an 'increased education level' for the population, which will lead to that country being able to compete better on the international stage.
Gilly appears to disagree :/ He also keeps going on about some courses being worse for someone wanting a career in that thing, than the course being scrapped altogether! Which just about the whole of the population of the UK will disagree with!
Kinda' bizarre .. but I'm going to have to drop it soon ..
Last edited:
So do I, especially if you're dumbing down the early years as has happened over the last 15 years or so.
Unless you measure education by attained, locally set qualifications rather than against global metrics...