Degree apprenticeships v university degrees

I would have hoped so, but it's clear that others feel differently.

Doodledog "Universities are not, and should never become training grounds for employment, IMO. They are places for learning and broadening horizons, as you say."

Absolutely and the skills that students develop such as researching, critical thinking, time management, working as a team etc etc are not dependent upon the subject studied but are common to every under grad course, vocational or not. It saddens me that anyone has such a narrow view of education, it harks back to times when poorer people were taught to read and write not so they could develop their knowledge of the world but in order to support industrialisation. Surely we've progressed past that?

I couldn't agree more, foxie. I would also hate to see a situation where only the wealthy can afford to study Arts and Humanities subjects, so our culture becomes the culture of the 'ruling class'. It is very important that everyone has a chance to have an input into the culture of the country as a whole, whether that is by producing TV programmes, playing in orchestras or writing novels. These things are not just entertainment, they are ways of making sense of the world, and it is vital that all sections of society are represented and have a chance to represent their realities.

For similar reasons, different perspectives on History are important, too, or we will end up in a world where people believe in 'facts' as told to them by the few people with access to documents and artefacts. The people who decide which versions of events are 'facts' have a lot more power than many realise.

Universities are not, and should never become training grounds for employment, IMO. They are places for learning and broadening horizons, as you say.

I hope we never focus on vocational degrees but continue to have a mix of the two. We enrich society intellectually and culturally through a broad based education, well educated parents widen the horizons of their children and we need artists, musicians, historians, anthropologists etc as much as we need accountants, lawyers and doctors etc. What a dreary world we would have if the only higher education was vocational.

There are of course many thousands of students do go into careers they studied for, many thousands of students who did not or never attained a graduate career at all
You haven't yet said what you mean by a 'graduate career', so I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say to that.

we have been producing far to many graduates for the jobs available for many years.
Again, this is a statement with absolutely no substance. What do you mean by 'too many', and how are you measuring it? Are you assuming that graduates should only take 'graduate jobs', whatever they are? If not, are you comparing figures for unemployed graduates with those of non-graduates? Some figures would be good, whatever you are saying, as it's really not clear. Statistically, people with degrees earn more and are less likely to be unemployed than those without.*

Increase the ability level for university entry, for some careers like veterinary science it is already high - 3 top grade A Levels do not assure a place, other courses have much lower requirements.
I agree that this is the case, but I'm not sure of your point. Is it that all prospective students should have the same qualifications? I can't see how that would work - professions such as veterinary surgery are very different from things like Business Studies, and will appeal to very different people with different skillsets.

It’s interesting that you acknowledge the shortcomings if the school system, I’ve often thought a computer would do the job better, then just employ someone to keep discipline, potty train, feed, teach dental hygiene and sort emotional problems.
That's an 'interesting' perspective. I have never taught in a school, but I was once a child, and my children went to school, and from what I remember, a computer could not have done the job at all well for either generation. Potty training, feeding and dental hygiene weren't needed for any of us though, or any of our classmates. If your views are based on a very different experience, however, that may explain your attitude to education?

*https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/latest/news/new-analysis-shows-students-who-choose

I went to a College of Education in late 60s. I recall 1 session on how to teach.
I soon realised I was not in the right profession. My strengths are in admin! Took a long time to realise that!

There are of course many thousands of students do go into careers they studied for, many thousands of students who did not or never attained a graduate career at all, we have been producing far to many graduates for the jobs available for many years. Increase the ability level for university entry, for some careers like veterinary science it is already high - 3 top grade A Levels do not assure a place, other courses have much lower requirements.

It’s interesting that you acknowledge the shortcomings if the school system, I’ve often thought a computer would do the job better, then just employ someone to keep discipline, potty train, feed, teach dental hygiene and sort emotional problems.

I don't think womansplaining is really a 'thing', but it seems I've touched a nerve .

Yes, you have stated your views, which are based on your own experience of working in (I assume) one line of work where you have encountered a limited number of young people. You have not given any insight outside of that. Debbie who doesn't understand bank loans cannot be representative of anything other than Debbie who doesn't understand bank loans. Nothing you have said shows how that lack of understanding is relevant to her choice of degree.

Mansplaining is when men tell women what those women already know because of their own lived experience - in my case that involves a whole career based in HE, writing several degrees, acting as an External Examiner, and liaising with professional bodies to ensure that a range of courses comply with professional requirements. I have seen hundreds (maybe thousands) of students graduate and go into work, and am in touch with many of them decades later, so have followed their progress from 21 or so to middle age.

I do have more of an oversight, so am not 'womansplaining'. I don't assume that because I am a woman, but because of my experience. If you explain why you feel that degrees 'should be' a certain way I am happy to engage with that - I certainly don't think I have the last word on the matter - but I have seen no evidence of that on this thread. 'These are my views based on the fact that they are my views' is not giving anything to go on, though.

I think your are posts are womansplaining

I’ve already stated my views

Feel free to call it mansplaining if it makes you feel better I have stated my opinion of higher education, which is, it should be more ability and career focused.

Why would I need to feel better? It's just irritating when someone seems unable to see beyond one way of doing things, without an explanation of why they feel as they do.

Degrees are ability focussed. They focus on different abilities, which is why there are so many of them. If it were simply a case of producing 'career focused' graduates they could all do a training course that didn't differentiate.

I don't really understand your comment about teachers - by no means all graduates go into teaching, and even if they did, the fact that the curriculum is narrow is the fault of Gove et al, not the teachers themselves. A schoolteacher might be able to say more, but my understanding is that many teachers are unhappy with the fact that they can't use the things they have learnt about education because of being hidebound.

I would see that as a failing of the school system, not of the courses that teach education, or of the teachers themselves, but as I say, I'm not clear what point you were making there.

“flexible, adaptable people who can think on their feet,”

Then give them jobs such as teachers and give them a rigid curriculum with very little flexibility at all

Doodledog

Your thinking is very 'black and white', and tends towards mansplaining. Why 'should' degrees be anything? People choose what works for them, and I don't see why there is any 'should' about it, just as I doubt that all employers want the same things from employees.

Much depends on the demands of the work. Some employers will want very specialised knowledge (and so whether the employee understands bank loans will be irrelevant, unless the role is in banking or finance), and others will want flexible, adaptable people who can think on their feet, which may be skills learned whilst studying something such as medieval archeology, even though the role is very far removed from the subject content.

Feel free to call it mansplaining if it makes you feel better I have stated my opinion of higher education, which is, it should be more ability and career focused.

Your thinking is very 'black and white', and tends towards mansplaining. Why 'should' degrees be anything? People choose what works for them, and I don't see why there is any 'should' about it, just as I doubt that all employers want the same things from employees.

Much depends on the demands of the work. Some employers will want very specialised knowledge (and so whether the employee understands bank loans will be irrelevant, unless the role is in banking or finance), and others will want flexible, adaptable people who can think on their feet, which may be skills learned whilst studying something such as medieval archeology, even though the role is very far removed from the subject content.

A nurse gets the degree in Nursing and goes straight into work at basic nursing salary, that’s what degrees are for. The nurse may the go on to get further qualification + years experience and increased salary.

A nurse does not need extra training, most degrees should also be career focused.

Doodledog

With respect, David, that is a lot of hot air.

Universities are not there to teach everything. They teach specialisms and the time spent there allows students to grow up in a relatively safe environment. Of course not all of them will do so at the same rate, and of course some will be more ‘sensible’ than others.

I could trot out anecdotes about non-graduates who don’t know how mortgages work, or who can’t change a car tyre, but they would signify nothing either. I hope that most of them know the difference between proving a point and clutching at straws though.

Graduates are supposed to be of good ability, many have very limited ability and not employable without further training. So they have to work as interns after they graduate.

That is what employers are disappointed about.

I met up with one of my GC on Friday. He was a classic school "failure" left with little in the way of qualifications and was rather too close to getting into serious trouble. He did an Access course and is now at University. He's developed into an articulate motivated and very personable young man who is interested in working with young offenders as a career. This focus on fitting people into slots at too young an age ignores the fact that young men, in particular, have brains that are still developing into their 20s. What you see at 16 is not necessarily what you get at 21 which is why society needs different routes for different people, flexibility is the key that can unlock potential.

With respect, David, that is a lot of hot air.

Universities are not there to teach everything. They teach specialisms and the time spent there allows students to grow up in a relatively safe environment. Of course not all of them will do so at the same rate, and of course some will be more ‘sensible’ than others.

I could trot out anecdotes about non-graduates who don’t know how mortgages work, or who can’t change a car tyre, but they would signify nothing either. I hope that most of them know the difference between proving a point and clutching at straws though.

“The snobbery around universities is ridiculous and in my experience quite often seems to come from people who weren't university educated themselves. I am not sure why?”

It’s not snobbery, I don’t care whether someone goes to university or not, many of the young people around me have been to “Uni” and are struggling because the did not learn any kind of employable skills, or even basic life skills.

Example, Debbie 22 asking me about buying a car she thought she was earning enough to pay the interest on a car loan - until I pointed out the capital needed repaying as well. This was 30 yrs ago, I still see her every few weeks and she’s always struggled. There are a great many like her who were pushed down the university line, when they did not have the basic ability.

I’m NOT anti university, for many careers it’s essential but you need the ability to benefit from it. It’s not like school nobody is going to push you, to learn you have to be self motivated and to benefit there needs to be employment that enables a reasonable lifestyle.

Many of the SMEs I know are run by non graduates who worked their way up the ladder learning the trade and have better lifestyles than most graduates

My grandson is doing a banking degree apprenticeship. They get paid as they progress. Thinking about how much debt students get into at the end of their degree is frightening so imo this is a better pathway to take. They probably work much harder than the average student but worth it in the end. They also are learning on the job.

I was doing a college course 5 years ago and some of the young people were apprentices for various employments eg accountancy, engineering of different kinds, business. They attended for 1 year of the 3 year course. I hope it is all different now as most of the apprentices I met were let go at the end of their course. No offer of employment by companies they trained with. Ststem seemed to be one group finishes and new one starts as financially beneficial for employers. Only a couple of years ago I did meet 3 of the students, two of whom were working in Argentina, engineering, and the other Dhubai hoping to be an estate agent. If a job is guaranteed at the end, then definitely be worthwhile. What happens if the candidate starts an apprenticeship then discovers they don't like the subject/work can they swop courses as most at Uni can.

That's really good to hear kitty and a nice starting salary too!

My GS is do science and maths A levels, hhis path of choice is university then Sandhurst. If grades not good enough for the exact courses he wants plans on 2 years work anything it's just to save then Sandhurst. He has a recruiting adviser, so totally out of family hands

Great news, kittylester, and well done GS!

Sorry, just seen your last post. Congratulations!

kittylester It would probably make sense for your grandson to apply for a university place as well as apprenticeships, he may be able to find a degree with a year in industry or some other sort of work placement in case he changes his mind about what he wants to do.
I can quite understand why people don't want to get into debt by going to university. One of my sons didn't finish paying his student loan back until he was well into his 30's. And apprenticeships often lead to really excellent jobs.
Whether an apprenticeship is a good idea or not depends on the type of work he wants to do in his chosen field, it's likely that a research position in R&D might require a degree for example. But he can discuss all this with potential employers at interview.