Education versus money

Aveline- your message says it all - absolutely agree.

It is obviously true that professionals such accountants and lawyers earn more and usually need a degree, but I don't know that a degree in a subject that isn't terribly useful will make a lot of difference.
One of my sons has two degrees but doesn't earn much. Another got a "not terribly useful" degree but part of his training (in electronics) enabled him to get a good job in a different field.
My youngest daughter tried university, hated it and left to get a job. She's doing pretty well, though not at the earnings level of a lawyer.
My DIL doesn't even have A-levels but is a lovely hard-working person and earns more than any of the others.
The two without degrees can always find new, well-paid jobs quickly whenever they need to.

M0nica

Also Newcastle, Duham and most of the Russell Group universities. Remember Economics degrees usually include the full range of finance and accounting.

As do Management degrees. There was a time when you couldn't do a "proper" degree in Management but this changed many years ago. There's a wonderful range of finance and accounting degrees now, and many degrees include macro and micro economic, Law and Human Resources (also a profession now) in the wide range of units included on these degrees.
You can study for many Arts or Science degrees in conjunction with many of these units.

Don't think you can generalise these days. Money and success can come from so many sources - the right social background; the right contacts; entrepreneurship.... Nowadays you can make wads of money from being an "influencer" or a social media star. However, for most people, I like to think that you can't beat having a good education and what an ex-boss of mine once described as an "unfailing niceness to work with".

I think it depends on what they do after university. I know plenty of graduates who have wasted their degree and are working in positions which don't require a degree. On the plus side, for them, they will probably never repay their student loan in full. Why do so many parents push their children yo do well in school, then go through university, then waste that qualification when they could have perhaps done an apprenticeship. We shouldn't expect that all our children should go to university, (the Blair vision). There are other options.

I think we should drastically reduce the number of students going to university, and offer a far wider range of qualifications at reinstated polytechnics. Since Mrs Thatcher turned all polys into universities (I am sure the purpose was so they would charge fees). there has been a great gap between qualifications studied at Further Education Colleges and going to university.

The Open University does a good job. but what are needed are colleges where those entering more vocational careers can incrementally develop their skills and possibly end up with a degree or qualify as a Chartered Engineer or equivalent.

Oopsadaisy1

I’ll let you know if and when our Grandson becomes a Barrister and how much he will still owe in University fees!
Maybe job security is a factor?
Although we always said we should have a Plumber, a Mechanic and Electrician and a builder in the family, they not only seem to have good earning potential but they often start up their own companies.

I would add a hairdresser to that list, Oopsadaisy1

*Callistemon DS got into the profession and succession of jobs he had always dreamed of and has been working in it happily and successfully for over 25 years. I do not think he has ever had a second thought as to whether his choice was right.

M0nica

I think we should drastically reduce the number of students going to university, and offer a far wider range of qualifications at reinstated polytechnics. Since Mrs Thatcher turned all polys into universities (I am sure the purpose was so they would charge fees). there has been a great gap between qualifications studied at Further Education Colleges and going to university.

The Open University does a good job. but what are needed are colleges where those entering more vocational careers can incrementally develop their skills and possibly end up with a degree or qualify as a Chartered Engineer or equivalent.

A lot of my friends did sandwich courses, taking HNDs and degrees in engineering and technical subjects at Colleges of Technology, which later became Polytechnics.

As far as I know they went on to have very successful careers and without the huge burden of debt that students have now.
Of course, businesses have to play up their part too by taking on students and apprentices and training them during the students' time with them.

Poly's were already awarding degrees through the CNAA (Council for National Academic Awards) long before they got charters to award their own. Giving them university status made no difference to that - it simply cut a layer of bureaucracy. Reinstating them as polytechnics would cut the number of students who get 'university degrees', which would make them more exclusive, and grant their holders the status that they used to have, so they would get so-called 'graduate jobs' regardless of aptitude for things like management. I know that many would like to see that happen, but as someone who believes in equality of opportunity I would rather have more graduates who have the knowledge that a degree proves, as well as the opportunities that that provides, even though it means that they have to compete to get top jobs.

I have no issue with universities also offering modular degrees that can be taken over a number of years so that people can learn 'on the job', however. Many already co-operate with employers to produce blended learning degrees where students are assessed on things they do in the workplace, in the same way as nurses and teachers on some teaching degrees. I don't know why that provision should be peculiar to polytechnics though, other than to preserve an elitism that (IMO) has no place in modern society.

CNAA degrees were mainly in engineering and similar subjects and were no less regarded than a straight university degree. Most recipients of them had considerable work experience.

Polytechnics also offered a wide range of just sub-degree courses, pioneered courses that mixed work and study. Other countries have separate technical training.

If polys were re-introduced I would hope to see many of the essentially vocational degrees would be studied there. the size of universities and the range of subjects could then be reduced.

Many vocational courses became degree subjects when studying for a degree gave access to maintenance grants and free fees. DD did an acting degree at a well regarded acting college. All their courses had been turned into degrees for just that reason. In three years DD did one piece of written work, the courses were not truly degree level and now that student funding imperative has gone, many no longer need to describe their courses as degrees. It was an excellent training in acting, but really not academic enough to be a degree.

There is a silly snobbishness in this country about technical training and technical subjects. My DH is a Chartered Engineer and when giving his profession to people for insurance forms and the like, I have been asked if he works in a garage.

He is also a member of a European Engineering body and in Germany his business card announces that he is 'Herr Ing' . A title which puts being an engineer on the same level as being a doctor.

Certainly in Germany and assume Europe generally vocational studies are as highly regarded as academic studies and is not seen as second class as it is here.

No, CNAA degrees included English, History, Art and Art History- pretty much everything that any university awarded. The CNAA model could usefully be applied to all HE, I think. It ensured equal standards across and within institutions in a way that allowing individual universities to award their own degrees with only the input of External Examiners from outside might not. An occasional HEFC inspection is a very inefficient way to achieve parity, and has moved to a ‘lighter touch’ approach anyway. A universal awarding body would probably bring problems of its own, but might stop the massive generalisations from people who think that there is huge disparity between institutions, too.

I’m not denigrating Engineering - I married one . In one of my cross-university roles I had a lot to do with Engineering, too. It tends to be an area where more people get very touchy about pointing out their professional status (ie graduates and those with Chartership as opposed to those without) - Librarianship being another. I don’t know how moving the courses to Polytechnics would help that though.

The trouble with moving subjects from some institutions to others is that it restricts access for those doing blended learning, as they can’t attend both work and their course, particularly if they also have a family if the nearest university or college with the relevant course is too far away. That might work in somewhere like London, with numerous educational institutions in a small area, but many areas have very few to choose from, and more problems with transport. Genuinely equal access needs to work across the country as well as across subjects.

I had an English friend in Austria who married an engineer. She was referred to as Frau Ing Bloggs.
Still makes me smile.

There are companies which have students who are employees and attend university to do a degree. There are also companies who fund students to do degree on the understanding they will work for them when they graduate. These degree courses are vastly oversubscribed and only the most brilliant students are accepted. Understandably as they graduate without debt.

M0nica

CNAA degrees were mainly in engineering and similar subjects and were no less regarded than a straight university degree. Most recipients of them had considerable work experience.

Polytechnics also offered a wide range of just sub-degree courses, pioneered courses that mixed work and study. Other countries have separate technical training.

If polys were re-introduced I would hope to see many of the essentially vocational degrees would be studied there. the size of universities and the range of subjects could then be reduced.

Many vocational courses became degree subjects when studying for a degree gave access to maintenance grants and free fees. DD did an acting degree at a well regarded acting college. All their courses had been turned into degrees for just that reason. In three years DD did one piece of written work, the courses were not truly degree level and now that student funding imperative has gone, many no longer need to describe their courses as degrees. It was an excellent training in acting, but really not academic enough to be a degree.

There is a silly snobbishness in this country about technical training and technical subjects. My DH is a Chartered Engineer and when giving his profession to people for insurance forms and the like, I have been asked if he works in a garage.

He is also a member of a European Engineering body and in Germany his business card announces that he is 'Herr Ing' . A title which puts being an engineer on the same level as being a doctor.

CNAA degrees were mainly in engineering and similar subjects and were no less regarded than a straight university degree. Most recipients of them had considerable work experience.

Yes, I helped set some of the courses up in the 1960s, they expanded to include other subjects such as Computing Science.
Graduates were highly regarded and sought after as those on sandwich courses had the depth of knowledge of work experience too.

I know some firms take on trainees now and they are able to take degrees whilst working as well as higher qualifications. DS was able to do this a few years ago as has a GN more recently.

However, places are limited and competition for them is fierce.

There is a silly snobbishness in this country about technical training and technical subjects

Yes, there is!
Unlike Germany, for example.

Glorianny

There are companies which have students who are employees and attend university to do a degree. There are also companies who fund students to do degree on the understanding they will work for them when they graduate. These degree courses are vastly oversubscribed and only the most brilliant students are accepted. Understandably as they graduate without debt.

Yes, places are few and far between.

People who make the most money are people who run their own business.

For example an emergency plumber, charged me £180 for an hour which has to be paid in cash, and he received three other calls when it was 7pm at night.

With so many graduates with degrees, employers now expect a degree + experience for entry level positions. Catch 22, without a job how can a new graduate gain work experience?

That’s when having middle class parents really help because the parents will bankroll their AC for a paid or unpaid internship and use their connections to make sure their AC get that work experience.

The same goes with apprenticeship. At £5.28 /hr at 19, you need help from your parents if you want to do an apprenticeship which required moving away from home.

Callistemon21

Glorianny

There are companies which have students who are employees and attend university to do a degree. There are also companies who fund students to do degree on the understanding they will work for them when they graduate. These degree courses are vastly oversubscribed and only the most brilliant students are accepted. Understandably as they graduate without debt.

Yes, places are few and far between.

Many of these are the blended learning course I mentioned. They allow people without traditional qualifications to get recognition for what they are doing at work, and yes, many are in Engineering-related disciplines. Old fashioned day-release and sandwich degrees still exist, but are thinner on the ground than they used to be, possibly because more young people start their working lives with degrees nowadays, so there will be fewer takers.

I am in favour of having as many possible routes into education as possible, so that people don't have doors closed to them in the way they used to. I don't think that having a two (or more) tier system is the way forward though. All that does is continue the snobbery and elitism that held back so many people in the past, and wastes a lot of talent that would benefit the country as a whole.

Doodledog

Callistemon21

Glorianny

There are companies which have students who are employees and attend university to do a degree. There are also companies who fund students to do degree on the understanding they will work for them when they graduate. These degree courses are vastly oversubscribed and only the most brilliant students are accepted. Understandably as they graduate without debt.

Yes, places are few and far between.

Many of these are the blended learning course I mentioned. They allow people without traditional qualifications to get recognition for what they are doing at work, and yes, many are in Engineering-related disciplines. Old fashioned day-release and sandwich degrees still exist, but are thinner on the ground than they used to be, possibly because more young people start their working lives with degrees nowadays, so there will be fewer takers.

I am in favour of having as many possible routes into education as possible, so that people don't have doors closed to them in the way they used to. I don't think that having a two (or more) tier system is the way forward though. All that does is continue the snobbery and elitism that held back so many people in the past, and wastes a lot of talent that would benefit the country as a whole.

No these are sponsored degree courses aimed at students straight out of school. They are heavily over subscribed. There's a leaflet for schools to hand out www.ucas.com/file/301201/download?token=h5NNR0bR

Ah, they are different from the ones I'm talking about, which are designed for those already in work, and are to some extent replacing day release. Typically students complete a portfolio showing how their experience matches the learning outcomes of the programme, and the university works with the employer to ensure that the student has the opportunities to plug any gaps, and set assignments that can be completed by carrying out live projects in the workplace, so it's a 'win win' outcome.

I think these only go to the really high achievers and I think they are promoted most in Independent schools.

If that is the case Glorianny things have changed drastically in the last few decades.

These sandwich courses and blended courses were very much the area where those who had struggled at school or gone astray got their feet back on a career path.

My department used to take these students, most from polys, and certainly state schools. They had usually done well at O level, lost their way at A level and were doggedly making up for lost time.

Yes, things have changed in the last few decades! It was in 1992 when poly's (which were not technical colleges, but taught a wide range of subjects to graduate level) became universities. The change was not as radical as many seem to think - it meant that they could award their own degrees, and that more people became university graduates instead of polytechnic ones, but otherwise things continued much as before. These days many 'new universities' do very well in league tables, and some go head to head with old ones when it comes to research projects and funding.

There hasn't been a move away from students taking technical subjects at degree level, or a decline in standards as a result of the 1992 changes. Yes, a university degree is less 'valuable' as more people have them, so those who see it as a passport to a well-paid job for life will be disappointed. Graduates now have to compete to get jobs that used to be considered a right, which is no bad thing, IMO.