Degree apprenticeships v university degrees

The thing is that we haven't had polytechnics since 1992, which is more than 30 years ago, and a lot has changed in that time. It is unlikely that there will be many people still working who have spanned both systems (ie who were employing people pre 1992 as well as doing so now). Even if there are some left, the chances are that unless their profession has stagnated they will have moved with the times and adapted along with the education system.

Post-92 institutions have been run as universities for so long that there is little or nothing to distinguish them. The funding was the big difference, and the fact that Polys concentrated on teaching rather than research. Now all HE is funded by HEFCE (in England) and everyone is expected to bring in money from research.

So much of what people say is based on a very out of date perspective, which was probably inaccurate even 30 years ago. Luckily, current employers are, on the whole, able to see beyond that rather narrow-minded view.

My eldest grandson did a mechanical engineering degree apprenticeship 15 years ago and found it to be the best of both worlds. He gained his degree with no indebtedness and he and his wife have been able to buy a 'forever' home in their early 30s. He has never been out of work.

As others have said, however, these degree apprenticeships are hard to come by. When my grandson applied there were over 250 applicants for 6 posts - they have to be very determined.

It depends what he wants to do after his degree. If he wants to go into research or to work for one of the "blue chip" companies, he'll probably need a masters or even a PhD at some point anyway. He might find that there's a "ceiling" on his promotion prospects without a university degree.

He is aware of that growstuff but at the moment he doesn't know where his future might lie. Which is often the same for university students.

Given how many people goto universities now, it means more competition to get a job afterwards. Many end up working in an environment they could have got had they applied on leaving school at 18.
I would say an apprenticeship is a terrific opportunity to work and learn while being paid throughout with no student debt.

Exactly so Silverbridhe.

Doodledog, many employers now are fully aware of which universities were previously polys or technical colleges. Many employers seek graduates with good degrees from RG universities and are not interested in applicants whose cvs don’t include a favoured university. It’s a fact whether people like it or not.

kittylester

He is aware of that growstuff but at the moment he doesn't know where his future might lie. Which is often the same for university students.

It's a difficult one. My personal feeling (with some anecdotal evidence) is that a university degree would keep his options open. My partner has just retired as a biochemistry professor at a RG university and I know that they favour university graduates for internal posts. On the other hand, they're under so much pressure to fill their masters courses (and earn money for the university) that it's relatively easy to get a place. My partner supervised MRes students, who spent half of their course in industrial placements. He might want to consider that. My partner is sitting next to me and, in his opinion, a masters is essential for anybody considering a career in science, whatever the initial course. Many of them are offered permanent jobs (with prospects) by the companies offering placements. My son-in-law has a degree and masters in biochemistry and genetics from a RG university. He found a job very easily and is now a senior manager (in his early 30s) in a national company. He's leapfrogged over people who didn't have his academic background. (Having said that, the fees were quite a bit less than they are now.)

silverlining48

Given how many people goto universities now, it means more competition to get a job afterwards. Many end up working in an environment they could have got had they applied on leaving school at 18.
I would say an apprenticeship is a terrific opportunity to work and learn while being paid throughout with no student debt.

Maybe you DGS should look at the opportunities available. Many jobs in science are at technician level, which is maybe not what he's hoping for.

I'm a bit confused. I thought they still gained their appropriate degree during an apprenticeship, though it is generally the vocational qualification route - HND/foundation degree then top up qualification? (L4, L5 and L6)

Barleyfields

Here are some figures Doodledog
commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01079/#:~:text=The%20Government%20forecasts%20that%20around,loan%20repayments%20for%20new%20students.

From the link, this bothers me: "The Government forecasts that around 65% of full-time undergraduates starting in 2023/24 would repay them in full. This is more than double the forecast for the 2022/23 cohort (27%) because of reforms to student loan repayments for new students."

Loans should be paid, 35% not repaid is totally unacceptable.

JaneJudge

I'm a bit confused. I thought they still gained their appropriate degree during an apprenticeship, though it is generally the vocational qualification route - HND/foundation degree then top up qualification? (L4, L5 and L6)

Whatever the claims, degrees are not all equal - and most employers know that. It really does depend on the field of the degree. It's a fact that there are "glass ceilings" and in some careers, it's very hard to break through without a degree (and masters) from one of the more so-called prestigious universities. For many people, that's absolutely fine because they don't aspire to senior positions.

Barleyfields

Exactly so Silverbridhe.

Doodledog, many employers now are fully aware of which universities were previously polys or technical colleges. Many employers seek graduates with good degrees from RG universities and are not interested in applicants whose cvs don’t include a favoured university. It’s a fact whether people like it or not.

I didn't say that people are unaware of which universities are post-92. This is the UK, after all . But my lived experience of seeing students go into work suggests that whereas 'many' employers may discriminate, 'many' others simply don't.

This may not be true across a range of disciplines, but IME it is more important that a course is validated by a professional body than that it is taught in an institution that was a university before 1992, whether people like that or not. Both universities where I have worked (and another where I was an external examiner) had courses in my subject area that are accredited by my professional body, and that was vital to students getting work. This is why I found it so frustrating when students wanted to have assessments tailored to their wishes - professional bodies do keep an eye on things, and if they pulled the plug whole cohorts would be negatively impacted.

Norah

Barleyfields

Here are some figures Doodledog
commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01079/#:~:text=The%20Government%20forecasts%20that%20around,loan%20repayments%20for%20new%20students.

From the link, this bothers me: "The Government forecasts that around 65% of full-time undergraduates starting in 2023/24 would repay them in full. This is more than double the forecast for the 2022/23 cohort (27%) because of reforms to student loan repayments for new students."

Loans should be paid, 35% not repaid is totally unacceptable.

Student loans were never set up like traditional loans. They operate more like a graduate income tax, which is why people who aren't high earners never earn enough to repay the loans PLUS interest. The reason more graduates will repay than two years ago is because the length of time before the loans are written off has been extended by an additional five years. During those five years, a significant increased amount is repaid, especially when inflation is factored in.

35% not repaid isn't unacceptable because the government is still earning a significant amount of money on the loans. The outstanding debts at the end of 35 years are really only a very small part of the total which graduates have paid in repayments and interest.

growstuff

35% not repaid isn't unacceptable because the government is still earning a significant amount of money on the loans. The outstanding debts at the end of 35 years are really only a very small part of the total which graduates have paid in repayments and interest.

We disagree.

It's unacceptable, to me. Don't take on debts and not repay.

My soon to be daughter-in-law is doing an apprentice masters in psychology. She is working with severely disturbed children aged 5-11 years. 4 days 24\7 then 5 days off. The children board. She has counselling after each 4 day session as it is such an emotional and hard experience. Goodness knows what is like for the poor little souls whose life has been utterly ruined by adults.

She finds it incredibly hard going and gets exhausted, I think, but very rewarding. She spends a month (I think - at university - full time) every term. She will be a full blown psychologist at the end of this. She does get paid which help towards paying off her original student loan I guess.

Just to add she did a full time degree at Southampton, before the masters.

Norah

growstuff

35% not repaid isn't unacceptable because the government is still earning a significant amount of money on the loans. The outstanding debts at the end of 35 years are really only a very small part of the total which graduates have paid in repayments and interest.

We disagree.

It's unacceptable, to me. Don't take on debts and not repay.

I'm not sure you really understand how students loans were set up. They're not like other loans.

Whitewavemark2

Just to add she did a full time degree at Southampton, before the masters.

I think masters courses are different, especially if it's a MRes. My daughter has undergraduate and masters degrees in history and economics. She was recruited by the civil service in HR on the strength of her transferable analytical skills gained at a good "uni". She's now doing CIPD Level 7, which is the equivalent of another masters degree in HR. During the first couple of years after graduating she was working with people who had vocational degrees in HR and some who had worked their way up the ladder. However, having spent a couple of years learning the job, she's gained promotion on the strength of her academic background, while the others who originally had more knowledge of HR haven't moved on.

Doodledog

Barleyfields

Degree apprenticeships are an excellent idea. Earn whilst you learn and no student debt. Far too many go to university ‘for the experience’ and end up with a degree which doesn’t get them a job together with a mountain of debt which may end up being written off.

Do you have figures for this? What is 'far too many', and which measures have been used to collect the data?

Also, why have you put 'for the experience' in inverted commas? It sounds as though you don't value the way in which young people grow up in their time at university in a semi-independent setting (sorry if I have misunderstood).

I think the university experience is very valuable. For many years I saw generations of students come in as immature 18 year olds and leave as confident, mature 21 year olds, after three years of living away from parents, learning how to get along with other people and make decisions for themselves.

It is fair to say that most people grow up between 18 and 21, but IME there was a marked difference between students who go away to university and those who live at home.

The 'experience' is not just about socialising and having fun (although that is valuable too), but about mixing with a range of people in a way that many people never do. I worked in both a prestigious RG university and in a post-92 'new' one, and saw this in a number of ways - people mixing with peers from comprehensive schools for the first time, people realising that 'talking posh' does not necessarily equate to talking sense, people making friends with others from very different cultures and so on. By no means everyone gets the opportunity to do that if they stay at home - the chances are they will mix with people like themselves, both at home and at work.

The debt side of things is, IMO, a shame. I would like to see free education to the point where people can take advantage of it (ie if someone is qualified for, and accepted on a course they should be able to study on it) so that the population is made up of people educated to their potential. As you say, however, some debt is written off, which IMO is fine if this is because people haven't earned enough to pay despite working for many years - some lines of work are horribly underpaid. If, OTOH, people take a university place and then don't work, the debt should remain, and ways should be found to reclaim it.

I think the concept of 'degree apprenticeships' is interesting. I know nothing about them from an educational perspective, but the very fact that they are being so obviously flagged as 'degree equivalent' shows that we are still not recognising trades and 'hands-on' work as being as valuable as graduate work. I think that correcting that would be a good way forward.

This is where the old Colleges of Technology and Polytechnics were so good.

Students could apply for sandwich courses, sponsored by eg engineering firms and spent six months in industry, six months at college studying for a degree in various engineering disciplines. Some took HND courses which were more valued then, I think, than now.

The students had the full experience of college life but were learning practical skills pertaining to their degree in their six months each year in industry.

Some firms, eg accountancy firms and some others, will offer posts to school leavers; they will work for the firm but study for a degree at the same time. However, the competition for places is very fierce; I know that there were 200 applicants for just two places when my DGN applied.

Best of luck to your grandson, kittylester, I'm sure it will be worth all the effort he is putting in.

Degree or no degree, where I work you cannot get promoted, you have to apply for the higher job even if it is internal only. Then if offered the job after interview, you have to hand your notice in. I have never worked anywhere where this happens before so I am not sure if it is typical of big organisations or not.

Norah Student loans were never intended to be like traditional loans because people whose parents could make the biggest contributions would have had an advantage.

The idea was to enable everybody to take up the opportunity of higher education if they had the potential to benefit from it and then pay back according to ability to pay.

Obviously, the mega-rich don't even need to take out student loans and the most poorly paid pay back more than those who can pay back quickly because they're paying more interest, but the idea always was that it would be a form of graduate tax based on the graduate's lifetime earnings.

Like banks, the government (or the student loans company) is making more money from interest payments than it is from capital repayments. Not only that, but the country benefits from having a highly educated workforce, so the graduates aren't the only beneficiaries.

JaneJudge

Degree or no degree, where I work you cannot get promoted, you have to apply for the higher job even if it is internal only. Then if offered the job after interview, you have to hand your notice in. I have never worked anywhere where this happens before so I am not sure if it is typical of big organisations or not.

I've never worked anywhere where you don't have to apply for promotion. I know both my children have always had to apply, so I think it is typical. In my opinion, it's better because otherwise the only people who would be promoted would be the boss's favourites.

It was the handing notice in I found weird. Every day is a school day

growstuff

JaneJudge

I'm a bit confused. I thought they still gained their appropriate degree during an apprenticeship, though it is generally the vocational qualification route - HND/foundation degree then top up qualification? (L4, L5 and L6)

Whatever the claims, degrees are not all equal - and most employers know that. It really does depend on the field of the degree. It's a fact that there are "glass ceilings" and in some careers, it's very hard to break through without a degree (and masters) from one of the more so-called prestigious universities. For many people, that's absolutely fine because they don't aspire to senior positions.

I suppose it depends which industry.
One of my friends from 'the old days' did a sandwich course taking HND. The firm was a well-known household name; he continued working for them all his working life and became a director.
Others may move on of course.

A degree from a 'prestigious' university which is not in a relevant subject may not be much use at all in a firm whose field of expertise may require in depth practical knowledge of, for example, engineering, electronics.