What are the benifits of Higher Education?

asprilla

rjsterry wrote:

welkman wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

For me it was eight years of cheap and plentiful drugs and booze, little in the way of responsibility and hanging around with lissom young ladies.

I wonder if this is the main attraction for most!

Was going to post something, but I'd just end up bitterly ranting about media studies and business studies 'students'.

What's the issue asks the business studies graduate who works in the media?

veronese68

I'm still on my year off. I do wonder if I'd be doing better if I'd gone to uni, but if I had I wouldn't be doing what I do now, I wouldn't have met my wife and my life would be completely different. I'm generally happy with my lot, I have no idea how my life would differ. I doubt it would be much happier.
I will encourage my son to go to uni. He is already a lot more academic than me. He knows what he wants to do, even if it is unlikely. I still don't know what i want to be when I grow up. I do worry about how we are going to be able to afford to send him, I suspect we will find a way.
If I had gone to uni perhaps I'd be able to fund his more easily. Or, perhaps not.
My wife has a degree in European studies. It was a very new type of course back then. She had a year in France as part of it. She doesn't use her degree in her professional life at all. She is currently temping having been laid off but has spent most of her working life in marketing. Gradually becoming more specialised to the point she was doing comm's for a local council and a large part of her job was translating things into plain English and proof reading.
Her last job was in John Lewis as Christmas staff and there were a lot of new graduates. She said the majority had no idea of how to deal with people and were severely lacking in life experience and common sense.
To answer the original question. I have no idea.

okgo

What uni doesn't teach people is how to make the most of themselves, whether they have a 1st from Oxford, or a 3rd from Kingston.

I've always been fairly willing to up-sticks and go with a better opportunity if its presented itself, the amount of people that stay in a job they don't like, or pays a crap wage because its easy and they're comfortable is massive, I've met so many like that in the short time I've been working. If you place making money high on your list of priority's, which I do, then its worth thinking about what you plan to do in each role and what you need to get out of it to move to the next level, be it in house or at another company.

rolf_f

Shame the term 'graduate' has been devalued so much. Really, these days you need an MSc to stand out so that's another extra year you need out of the workplace which, in many cases, shouldn't be practically necessary. But that's the only way to distinguish yourself from the hoards of graduates who come out of their first degrees unable to write, spell or reason (the latter being particularly disappointing - what's the point if, after 3 years, you still can't think and reason?).

Paulie W

okgo wrote:

What uni doesn't teach people is how to make the most of themselves, whether they have a 1st from Oxford, or a 3rd from Kingston.

I've always been fairly willing to up-sticks and go with a better opportunity if its presented itself, the amount of people that stay in a job they don't like, or pays a crap wage because its easy and they're comfortable is massive, I've met so many like that in the short time I've been working. If you place making money high on your list of priority's, which I do, then its worth thinking about what you plan to do in each role and what you need to get out of it to move to the next level, be it in house or at another company.

I couldnt disagree more. A University education should widen your horizons, help you better understand the world and your place in it. And it should help you to make the most of yourself. In my experience it is people without an education who are much more likely to stay in the same job and accept their lot.

rick_chasey

suzyb wrote:

Avoiding work for a few years.

I worked a lot lot harder at uni than I ever have since.

It was up to me how much work to do, so I ended up doing a lot. For significant parts I would be working the equivalent of 9-6 every day, weekends, the lot.

Now I do what I'm told and spend half my time browsing the internet, and I have the weekends off.

daviesee

You might learn to proof read at Uni :twisted:

"benifits"

Sorry. Had to be done

veronese68

I think making all the poly's uni's had devalued things somewhat. There were some degree's from certain poly's that were highly valued, but it was known in that field which ones they were. I think doing law at Kingston Poly was better than doing law at many uni's.

rick_chasey

Veronese68 wrote:

I think making all the poly's uni's had devalued things somewhat. There were some degree's from certain poly's that were highly valued, but it was known in that field which ones they were. I think doing law at Kingston Poly was better than doing law at many uni's.

People know if your uni was an ex poly or not.

I think this hand is overplayed.

If you have a degree in English lit from som ex poly, and your A level english grade was a D, no-one's going to confuse you with someone graduated from Oxford University in the same subject.

DonDaddyD

Paulie W wrote:

okgo wrote:

What uni doesn't teach people is how to make the most of themselves, whether they have a 1st from Oxford, or a 3rd from Kingston.

I've always been fairly willing to up-sticks and go with a better opportunity if its presented itself, the amount of people that stay in a job they don't like, or pays a crap wage because its easy and they're comfortable is massive, I've met so many like that in the short time I've been working. If you place making money high on your list of priority's, which I do, then its worth thinking about what you plan to do in each role and what you need to get out of it to move to the next level, be it in house or at another company.

I couldnt disagree more. A University education should widen your horizons, help you better understand the world and your place in it. And it should help you to make the most of yourself. In my experience it is people without an education who are much more likely to stay in the same job and accept their lot.

Not least of which the post/view doesn't account for the many circumstances where a person might have to stay in a job they don't like or pays a crap wage. It also doesn't account for the fact that the 'crap wage' and easy job may be a necessary sacrifce for a greater good, like caring for a loved one.

Rolf wrote:

Shame the term 'graduate' has been devalued so much. Really, these days you need an MSc to stand out so that's another extra year you need out of the workplace which, in many cases, shouldn't be practically necessary. But that's the only way to distinguish yourself from the hoards of graduates who come out of their first degrees unable to write, spell or reason (the latter being particularly disappointing - what's the point if, after 3 years, you still can't think and reason?).

While I agree that the term graduate has been devalued because there are an increasing number of graduates. I just find the latter part of the post unnecessary. I struggle with grammar for my own personal reasons. Equally, as I have pointed out before, I have friends with dyslexia who struggle with language as a whole. They are graduates though and very few would contest the validity of their degrees. Moreover, the inability to reason could be rationalised as a personality trait. You could be, academically, the smartest person in World if you have a disagreeable, stubborn or obstinate personality it doesn't really matter where you go to study, you are who you are.

Ergo - Unnecessary.

okgo

Paulie W wrote:

okgo wrote:

What uni doesn't teach people is how to make the most of themselves, whether they have a 1st from Oxford, or a 3rd from Kingston.

I've always been fairly willing to up-sticks and go with a better opportunity if its presented itself, the amount of people that stay in a job they don't like, or pays a crap wage because its easy and they're comfortable is massive, I've met so many like that in the short time I've been working. If you place making money high on your list of priority's, which I do, then its worth thinking about what you plan to do in each role and what you need to get out of it to move to the next level, be it in house or at another company.

I couldnt disagree more. A University education should widen your horizons, help you better understand the world and your place in it. And it should help you to make the most of yourself. In my experience it is people without an education who are much more likely to stay in the same job and accept their lot.

Maybe, perhaps its something that is either obvious to you and you'll do it anyway, or its not. Plenty of people I know are no hopers despite various uni degree's. They live supported for 3 years, I view it like a false flat in cycling, you think you're living in the real world, and suffer real world pressures, but actually you don't, you live in a house supplied by the uni, or your parents, and you'll never get kicked out even if you fail over and over again, money has no meaning as its given to you on a plate (it has meaning when you have to pay it back!!) and come out often still needing direction on every aspect of their lives.

Obvious exceptions apply, but personally, I can't think I would have learned more about real life and what is out there than I did in my 4 years of working various full time jobs and living in a rented property with some mates.


@DDD get a grip, he's not taking the piss out of people with medical disability is he, so don't play that card. Ask anyone who is the hiring manager for a proper company about some of the grads they see. They'll tell you some are excellent, and they will tell you that a big portion of them are complete and utter idiots that have no hope of anything unless they buck their ideas up.

rolf_f

DonDaddyD wrote:

I just find the latter part of the post unnecessary. I struggle with grammar for my own personal reasons. Equally, as I have pointed out before, I have friends with dyslexia who struggle with language as a whole. They are graduates though and very few would contest the validity of their degrees. Moreover, the inability to reason could be rationalised as a personality trait. You could be, academically, the smartest person in World if you have a disagreeable, stubborn or obstinate personality it doesn't really matter where you go to study, you are who you are.

DDD - it's a generalisation. Obviously, dyslexia is a specific issue and I would expect that to be taken into account of (assuming I was aware that the person had dyslexia). Even with dyslexia, there is no excuse for poorly written, badly spelled CVs. If you haven't the wit to get such a crucial document proof read, then what have you the wit for?

As for reasoning - there are any number of different and contrary personality traits all of which may have their specific benefits (not that the interview process finds them all as, of course, it is normally heavily biased towards the outgoing and confident) but, in science, if you can't reason there are severe limits to your practical use. This is somthing that can be taught but the focus on results over all else seems to have left this forgotten.

Edit - lol. After I post this I see an advert for custom cycling jerseys - "no minmums" (and no second i either). Would I use this company or would I assume that if it can't even proof read its own advert, that if I do use it, I'll end up wasting time with their returns department due to spelling errors on the jerseys?

rick_chasey

Degrees are becoming a necessity for any white collar work whatsoever.

I wouldn't have been considered for my current job had I not had a degree, and it's the same for other people who we've hired in similar roles to me.

Having said that, only one of our bosses has a degree, and that was from a poly.

My job does not remotely need any skills that a degree can provide. None. If anything, they'd be better off taking on people who have been in the industry for 5 years.

The problem is, now, if you don't have a degree at my age, people wonder if there's something wrong with you.

That might change with the fees. They may now wonder if you're just poor.

veronese68

Rick Chasey wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

I think making all the poly's uni's had devalued things somewhat. There were some degree's from certain poly's that were highly valued, but it was known in that field which ones they were. I think doing law at Kingston Poly was better than doing law at many uni's.

People know if your uni was an ex poly or not.

I think this hand is overplayed.

If you have a degree in English lit from som ex poly, and your A level english grade was a D, no-one's going to confuse you with someone graduated from Oxford University in the same subject.

True, in the same way people knew which poly's were any good. Please feel free to ignore that post, I'm obviously just writing nonsense. Quiet day at work.

veronese68

okgo wrote:

Ask anyone who is the hiring manager for a proper company about some of the grads they see. They'll tell you some are excellent, and they will tell you that a big portion of them are complete and utter idiots that have no hope of anything unless they buck their ideas up.

This is very true. As my Mrs said when temping at John Lewis many of the recent grads were clueless, but thought they knew a lot. They wondered why they couldn't get a full time job when she said they had absolutely no idea of how to deal with another human being.

DonDaddyD

okgo wrote:

@DDD get a grip, he's not taking the wee-wee out of people with medical disability is he, so don't play that card. Ask anyone who is the hiring manager for a proper company about some of the grads they see. They'll tell you some are excellent, and they will tell you that a big portion of them are complete and utter idiots that have no hope of anything unless they buck their ideas up.

I'm not ranting here, I just found your post a little myopic.

There are any number of reasons why a person chooses to do the job that they do. Some would claim to have no choice.

As for som grads being excellent and a big portion being utter idiots. That logic could be applied to the entire population so I'm not seeing that as specific to graduates.

Rolf wrote:

As for reasoning - there are any number of different and contrary personality traits all of which may have their specific benefits (not that the interview process finds them all as, of course, it is normally heavily biased towards the outgoing and confident) but, in science, if you can't reason there are severe limits to your practical use. This is somthing that can be taught but the focus on results over all else seems to have left this forgotten.

I actually don't disagree with this point. In terms of cognitive thinking does seem to be on the decline.

Paulie W

It does make me chuckle this idea that 21 year olds leaving university with a degree are so much less prepared for the "real world" than those 21 years olds who never went to Uni. None of my best friends from school went to Uni while I did. During that time they all lived at home, did jobs with limited responsibility and spent most of their money on Friday and Saturday nights. I dont think they were unusual then and they certainly wouldnt be unusual now. Most 21 years olds are idiots with not much of a clue!

notsoblue

Higher education doesn't guarantee you're going to be a model employee. I don't think anyone has said that on this thread, but people are still falling over themselves to point out examples of graduates who they've found wanting...

okgo

DonDaddyD wrote:

okgo wrote:

@DDD get a grip, he's not taking the wee-wee out of people with medical disability is he, so don't play that card. Ask anyone who is the hiring manager for a proper company about some of the grads they see. They'll tell you some are excellent, and they will tell you that a big portion of them are complete and utter idiots that have no hope of anything unless they buck their ideas up.

I'm not ranting here, I just found your post a little myopic.

There are any number of reasons why a person chooses to do the job that they do. Some would claim to have no choice.

As for som grads being excellent and a big portion being utter idiots. That logic could be applied to the entire population so I'm not seeing that as specific to graduates.

Rolf wrote:

As for reasoning - there are any number of different and contrary personality traits all of which may have their specific benefits (not that the interview process finds them all as, of course, it is normally heavily biased towards the outgoing and confident) but, in science, if you can't reason there are severe limits to your practical use. This is somthing that can be taught but the focus on results over all else seems to have left this forgotten.

I actually don't disagree with this point. In terms of cognitive thinking does seem to be on the decline.

Yes, but one would argue the majority coming out the other side of nearly 20 years of continuous education should on the whole not be idiots in the slightest, given that they have had such a long and allegedly comprehensive education.

okgo

Paulie W wrote:

It does make me chuckle this idea that 21 year olds leaving university with a degree are so much less prepared for the "real world" than those 21 years olds who never went to Uni. None of my best friends from school went to Uni while I did. During that time they all lived at home, did jobs with limited responsibility and spent most of their money on Friday and Saturday nights. I dont think they were unusual then and they certainly wouldnt be unusual now. Most 21 years olds are idiots with not much of a clue!

Clearly I'm the exception then. As you were :roll:

Paulie W

okgo wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

It does make me chuckle this idea that 21 year olds leaving university with a degree are so much less prepared for the "real world" than those 21 years olds who never went to Uni. None of my best friends from school went to Uni while I did. During that time they all lived at home, did jobs with limited responsibility and spent most of their money on Friday and Saturday nights. I dont think they were unusual then and they certainly wouldnt be unusual now. Most 21 years olds are idiots with not much of a clue!

Clearly I'm the exception then. As you were :roll:

Good for you! But one of the things you might have learnt had you gone to University is not too generalise from your own experience or to rely too heavily on anecdotal evidence ;-)

okgo

You might have learned when to use too and when to use to, but there we are

Paulie W

okgo wrote:

You might have learned when to use too and when to use to, but there we are

You got me their! All that education! What a fecking waste!

DonDaddyD

okgo wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

okgo wrote:

@DDD get a grip, he's not taking the wee-wee out of people with medical disability is he, so don't play that card. Ask anyone who is the hiring manager for a proper company about some of the grads they see. They'll tell you some are excellent, and they will tell you that a big portion of them are complete and utter idiots that have no hope of anything unless they buck their ideas up.

I'm not ranting here, I just found your post a little myopic.

There are any number of reasons why a person chooses to do the job that they do. Some would claim to have no choice.

As for som grads being excellent and a big portion being utter idiots. That logic could be applied to the entire population so I'm not seeing that as specific to graduates.

Rolf wrote:

As for reasoning - there are any number of different and contrary personality traits all of which may have their specific benefits (not that the interview process finds them all as, of course, it is normally heavily biased towards the outgoing and confident) but, in science, if you can't reason there are severe limits to your practical use. This is somthing that can be taught but the focus on results over all else seems to have left this forgotten.

I actually don't disagree with this point. In terms of cognitive thinking does seem to be on the decline.

Yes, but one would argue the majority coming out the other side of nearly 20 years of continuous education should on the whole not be idiots in the slightest, given that they have had such a long and allegedly comprehensive education.

Nah, some people have got it and some people don't. Academia is just the application of a particular type of skill. you can get intelligent footballers and some bloody foolish scientists.

NGale

Perhaps it isn't the degree or taking of a degree that is the problem, but the expectation of the student after gaining the qualification that's the issue.

Too many students live with the illusion that by simply having a degree they will get the best job in the world and be earning hundreds of thousands before they're 30. You only have to look at some of the student message boards to see some of the daft ideas they have about the future!

I have been though the traditional route and going through the vocational route, both have led to and will lead to a degree. My History degree was a traditional one and entry gained via A-Levels but my HNC (and eventual BSc) is a career change course for me, but for the majority of those in my class is a course which is their only way to progress further up the ladder at Babcock and Kawasaki, they all work full time and go to college on day release.

Education wise there is more than one way to skin a cat, not everyone is suited to the traditional route and yet will benefit from a degree in a field related to their job. This is where the vocational aspect comes in. I am a great believer in apprentiships (only wish I could have got one when I was younger myself) but then the training must be ongoing with the apprentice believing their education is ongoing and they can achieve a degree for themselves and that higher education isn't the preserve of the well off and middle classes.

Education at any level should not be exclusive to one class or another, it should be available to everyone

Jay dubbleU

Simple - indoor work with no heavy lifting

cyclingprop

Rick Chasey wrote:

Degrees are becoming a necessity for any white collar work whatsoever.

Kinda true. Degree or 4-5 years experience working yourself up to a decent level in a comparable field. E.g. 4-5 years experience in an IT helpdesk, working up to team/ITSD leader (depending on the size of it) will get you looked at for quite a bunch of jobs which would normally say "degree required". What is key is that the recruiter actually knows what they are talking about, can present the case (and is willing to), and that it isn't just home HR bod looking at the "CVs In" folder. Lots of ifs... but I've seen it happen many times.

sketchley

Rolf F wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I just find the latter part of the post unnecessary. I struggle with grammar for my own personal reasons. Equally, as I have pointed out before, I have friends with dyslexia who struggle with language as a whole. They are graduates though and very few would contest the validity of their degrees. Moreover, the inability to reason could be rationalised as a personality trait. You could be, academically, the smartest person in World if you have a disagreeable, stubborn or obstinate personality it doesn't really matter where you go to study, you are who you are.

DDD - it's a generalisation. Obviously, dyslexia is a specific issue and I would expect that to be taken into account of (assuming I was aware that the person had dyslexia). Even with dyslexia, there is no excuse for poorly written, badly spelled CVs. If you haven't the wit to get such a crucial document proof read, then what have you the wit for?

As for reasoning - there are any number of different and contrary personality traits all of which may have their specific benefits (not that the interview process finds them all as, of course, it is normally heavily biased towards the outgoing and confident) but, in science, if you can't reason there are severe limits to your practical use. This is somthing that can be taught but the focus on results over all else seems to have left this forgotten.

Edit - lol. After I post this I see an advert for custom cycling jerseys - "no minmums" (and no second i either). Would I use this company or would I assume that if it can't even proof read its own advert, that if I do use it, I'll end up wasting time with their returns department due to spelling errors on the jerseys?

I have dyslexia, I've never let it be an excuse or a reason for lower standards (Internet forums excluded). It's just something I ave to del with. For example all my client facing work documents are proof read by colleage who knows me and the mistakes I make due to dyslexia, problem solved and very amicable.

msmancunia

I think the benefits are the skills you learn as much as the facts. You learn to analyse and question things. You are exposed to a much wider range of society, from the toffs all the way down. You have to manage your money (very few students are bankrolled by the Bank of Mum and Dad these days), in some cases run a house (probably badly at first!), and for some people its their baptism into the world of current affairs and politics - they start to notice and care about what's going on in the world. My university education gave me an awful lot, but then again, so did caring for a terminally ill parent for six months when I was 23. It's like anything in life, what you experience, good or bad, shapes you into the person you're going to be.

W1

Rick Chasey wrote:

.

That might change with the fees. They may now wonder if you're just poor.

Ah, that old argument again.

Given that you pay fees back after uni, and when you're earning, they won't wonder if "you're just poor" at all. However they may wonder if you're a bit better able to judge the merits of something to you personally rather than just following the crowd.