Degree apprenticeships v university degrees

Scale of student loans in England
Currently £20 billion per year is loaned to around 1.5 million higher education students in England. The value of outstanding loans at the end of March 2024 reached £236 billion. The Government forecasts the value of outstanding loans to reach around £500 billion (2023‑24 prices) by the late-2040s.

The forecast average debt among the cohort of borrowers who started their course in 2022/23 is £45,600 when they complete their course. Forecast debt is expected to be lower for those starting in the reformed system from 2023/24 at £43,700.

The Government forecasts that around 65% of full-time undergraduates starting in 2023/24 would repay them in full.

Barleyfields

Absolutely OhOhOh, but the concern I have expressed is whether student loans are ever repaid.

Some individuals value education for something other than its monetary value, which is why summer schools and online courses in all sorts of esoteric subjects are thriving.

Personally, I'd rather pay a few hundred pounds for a quality short course in a subject for which I have a passion than spend money on handbags and shoes. I don't expect the economy to benefit, but they've improved my mental well-being. My choice!

It's difficult to access the value of one degree course against another but it is important to think about the level of debt incurred by different sorts of students. Students from better off families will usually leave with a lower level of debt, they are also more likely to get into Russell group universities and on to courses that lead to the most prestigious careers. there's lots of evidence to support this so I'm not posting a link.
So poorer students are hit in lots of different ways meaning they will probably take longer to repay any student loans they have, their debts will be higher and they are less likely to earn big salaries. Also, student loans are far from cheap money and the interest keeps ticking along. Regardless of what people think the student loans company are quite persistent in wanting their money back if the student has an income above the threshold. It's no wonder that degree apprenticeships are so competitive. Students from poorer backgrounds have a lot of disadvantages and a huge debt hanging round their necks is just another one.

Nobody employs anyone purely on the basis of teir academic requirments. They employ them for a mix of appropriate educational requirements, experience and personal characteristics, based on a whole raft of assessment methods.

As an employer, I have both turned down well qualified people for jobs because they lacked the personal characteristics we were looking for and employed people with fewer education achievements because they would fit in as members of the team.

growstuff

Barleyfields

Absolutely OhOhOh, but the concern I have expressed is whether student loans are ever repaid.

Some individuals value education for something other than its monetary value, which is why summer schools and online courses in all sorts of esoteric subjects are thriving.

Personally, I'd rather pay a few hundred pounds for a quality short course in a subject for which I have a passion than spend money on handbags and shoes. I don't expect the economy to benefit, but they've improved my mental well-being. My choice!

Of course. And so would I. But we would not be asking the taxpayer to fund the course of our choice and gamble on ever getting any repayments, let alone repayment in full.

But why would it be the taxpayer who is paying unless there is discrimination from employers. If courses have been validated by External Examiners and accredited by professional bodies, why are people saying that they are 'crap' without further information?

I still haven't had an answer to my question about how people can make judgments about courses they have neither studied nor examined in detail, and if the latter, why they are not taking the word of their professional body that standards are being met.

This is the third time I have asked this, so assume that the lack of an answer means that the question is being evaded, rather than missed.

The taxpayer foots the loan, which may never be repaid. Do you really think that an employer who has a choice between someone with a good degree from an RG university requiring a minimum of AAA for entrance and someone with the same degree from an ex-poly with entrance requirements of, say, BCC is guilty of discrimination if they choose the former candidate?

Which professional body would accredit, say, Stand-up Comedy or Puppet Design and Performance, two of the courses of questionable value mentioned above? To me, a professional body is a body which regulates a profession.

I don't know anything about stand-up comedy or puppet design and performance. Is there a PB for those disciplines? Equity?

I am genuinely interested in finding out why you think that a graduate (not an entrant) to a course that asks BCC is likely to be of a lower quality than one leaving a course where s/he started with AAA at A level at 18, when you have not taken either course or studied the curriculum. Repeating that 'an employer' would choose one over the other is not answering that question, as I'm sure you are aware.

Doodledog

I don't know anything about stand-up comedy or puppet design and performance. Is there a PB for those disciplines? Equity?

I am genuinely interested in finding out why you think that a graduate (not an entrant) to a course that asks BCC is likely to be of a lower quality than one leaving a course where s/he started with AAA at A level at 18, when you have not taken either course or studied the curriculum. Repeating that 'an employer' would choose one over the other is not answering that question, as I'm sure you are aware.

One of the funniest people I knew probably left school at 16, worked as Redcoat, did stand-up comedy and later was a scriptwriter for well-known comedians. Yes, they sdo have scriptwriters.
He always had a ready quip. 😁

I can't really see how comedy can be taught - someone either has it, a ready wit, or not.

I was an employer Doodledog. I have studied a good many cvs. I believe that gives me some perspective.

Barleyfields

I was an employer Doodledog. I have studied a good many cvs. I believe that gives me some perspective.

Maybe, but unless you tell us what it is that leads you to believe that some courses are ‘crap’, we will never be able to see that perspective for what it is. As I keep saying, I am interested in why the number of points required to get onto a course is so important to you, as that is the only metric I have seen you mention.

Do you believe that people stagnate at 18, or that this is the point at which their future promise can be assessed for the rest of their lives?

I have often said that it is better for people to move away to go to university, and you seem to be agreeing with that when you will only rate certain institutions as being ‘reputable’. Are you saying that those who can’t afford to live far from home should be forever deemed inferior? Are you aware that large areas of the UK have little no choice of university- people go to the one option or move away altogether? Pragmatics have to be considered in a lot of cases, surely?

You do seem to be deliberately avoiding my questions and expecting me to believe that you know because you know. That is something that all graduates I have taught (in whichever university) learn not to accept.

I have not deliberately avoided your questions Doodledog. We were given a few examples above of very niche degree courses which are unlikely to end in many people holding such degrees obtaining employment which will enable them to repay their loans. I am not one who subscribes to the idea that people should study what they enjoy, regardless of whether it has a good chance of leading to a job which will repay their debt. If students were self-supporting I wouldn’t care about what they studied - but the vast majority of UK students reading for a first degree are funded by the taxpayer.

Fine, but you still haven't answered my questions, even those in my post directly above yours. On what basis do you write off universities and course as inferior?

If people are applying to work for you (am I right in assuming you were a lawyer) they wouldn't have studied puppetry, yet you still say that unless they had X grade from Y university their qualifications and experience are effectively useless.

I'm just asking you to justify that stance, and have given numerous examples of reasons why I disagree with it. It would be good to see you answer at least some of them.

I’m not going to engage further in this pointless discussion Doodledog . I have stated my stance on the value of some degrees from some universities. I look for value in terms of ability to obtain jobs with salaries sufficient to repay loans. I don’t value the enjoyment factor for the student unless they are entirely self-funding, in which case they can study whatever and wherever they want. You and I will never agree on this so I am bowing out.

Ah well. I'll never know the reasoning for freezing out graduates from universities not on the 'respectable' list, and have no choice but to put it down to snobbery. I was willing to engage and listen, but I'm not really surprised that you can't come up with any rationale other than 'just because', as IMO there just isn't one.

I think that many people don't realise that some of the newer universities do a fantastic job of opening up possibilities for young people who by "traditional" standards have not thrived in the education system. They also offer a range of highly vocational degrees that give people entry into new and developing industries.
A woman interviewed on radio yesterday had started a highly successful clothing company, she has a degree from the University of Lancashire in Fashion Promotion and marketing. She credits some of her success to the help that she got from fellow graduates as well as the skills she learned on her course. My daughter's partner has a degree and masters in music technology from a new uni. He is working with AI and it's use in music and is linked up to several international and British universities as his work is unique. As I said in a previous post , "all education takes place under the long shadow of work" Bowles and Gintis. However, degree courses don't have to have a specific vocational focus to develop students for their place in society, education IMO offers so much more than that whatever the subject studied.

Well said, foxie.

True Foxie
In fact I worry more about my super bright DGS who gets straight As.
He is quite naive and immature in some ways so may or may not thrive at uni.

DD who eventually went to FE college to do her vocational course, which she loved, had already been to Aberdeen uni for a degree in Spanish and Linguistics. She dropped out partly due to boredom. It wasn't for her at all.

Greenfinch

My grandson is trying for apprenticeships in business or finance. He is finding it hard going especially as he won’t admit to his autism. He never has wanted to admit to it and says it would go against him. His twin sister on the other hand has applied to university to do Fine Art and so far has been accepted at three ( they ask for a merit in her diploma) without an interview or even submitting her portfolio.

A lot of tech companies view those on the Autism spectrum as assets to their workforce. Perhaps someone told your grandson that Autism is a disability and so he doesn't know that having a neurodiverse way of thinking can be a gift and an advantage. He will be successful at whatever he puts his mind to. I hope the same for his sister.

Evolutions take thousands of years.

OhOhOh

Scale of student loans in England
Currently £20 billion per year is loaned to around 1.5 million higher education students in England. The value of outstanding loans at the end of March 2024 reached £236 billion. The Government forecasts the value of outstanding loans to reach around £500 billion (2023‑24 prices) by the late-2040s.

The forecast average debt among the cohort of borrowers who started their course in 2022/23 is £45,600 when they complete their course. Forecast debt is expected to be lower for those starting in the reformed system from 2023/24 at £43,700.

*The Government forecasts that around 65% of full-time undergraduates starting in 2023/24 would repay them in full.*

£20 billion per year is loaned? Does that mean the Uni charges the government £20 billion per year in exchange for producing taxpayers?

Macadia
One of my daughters is autistic. She works for a multinational company. She is the lead on a multinational team that test the computer program in situ after the web developer has built it.

She set up a group of other employees doing the same job where they could all voice their problems. Because problems there are because most autistics come at problem solving with a different brain. That’s not always popular with the next person up in the chain of command if that person doesn’t understand autistcs.

Macadia

OhOhOh

Scale of student loans in England
Currently £20 billion per year is loaned to around 1.5 million higher education students in England. The value of outstanding loans at the end of March 2024 reached £236 billion. The Government forecasts the value of outstanding loans to reach around £500 billion (2023‑24 prices) by the late-2040s.

The forecast average debt among the cohort of borrowers who started their course in 2022/23 is £45,600 when they complete their course. Forecast debt is expected to be lower for those starting in the reformed system from 2023/24 at £43,700.

*The Government forecasts that around 65% of full-time undergraduates starting in 2023/24 would repay them in full.*

£20 billion per year is loaned? Does that mean the Uni charges the government £20 billion per year in exchange for producing taxpayers?

No. Loans cover/contribute to living expenses too. However it is a huge amount, hence my comments about degrees actually setting people up to earn enough to repay their loans.

Oh, I see. Thank you Barleyfields

No. Loans cover/contribute to living expenses too. However it is a huge amount, hence my comments about degrees actually setting people up to earn enough to repay their loans.
The trouble is that if employers discriminate against graduates from some universities without understanding why they are doing it, and in spite of accreditation from professional bodies, then graduates who have proven themselves acceptable to the professional body risk being unable to repay those loans.

Something of a vicious circle, eh?

I read on Mumsnet that these degree apprenticeships are very sought after and difficult to get, but the employers do not always choose a top tier university for their apprentices.

Sometimes, they choose the lower tier universities, ie the former polytechnics.