Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
University Education
Shouldn't a university education only be offered to the most academically able students? For example, how can someone who only obtained a poor A-Level grade in a subject be expected to study that subject at degree level?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rosepetal. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
This is what I have been saying for years. My husband works at a university and having read assignments, it would seem that a large percentage of students are unaware of the basics of English grammar.Many have difficulty in producing sentences that even make sense.
The percentage of students who return to take re-sits is a disgrace.When I was at university ,many moons ago, no-one had to do a resit, we could all spell and write correctly punctuated essays.
I attended a very prestigious grammar school in Birmingham (King Edward's) and the maximum O-levels anyboby got in those days was six. Nowadays,ten passes seems to be the norm. Are children brighter ? Are teachers getting better ? I don't think so.
My brother has thirty five years teaching experience.He frequently comments that he has pupils getting A grade A-levels who, twenty years ago, would have struggled to get the lowest O-level grade.
We used to joke that if a pupil could spell their name correctly they would pass. It doesn't so funny anymore.
The percentage of students who return to take re-sits is a disgrace.When I was at university ,many moons ago, no-one had to do a resit, we could all spell and write correctly punctuated essays.
I attended a very prestigious grammar school in Birmingham (King Edward's) and the maximum O-levels anyboby got in those days was six. Nowadays,ten passes seems to be the norm. Are children brighter ? Are teachers getting better ? I don't think so.
My brother has thirty five years teaching experience.He frequently comments that he has pupils getting A grade A-levels who, twenty years ago, would have struggled to get the lowest O-level grade.
We used to joke that if a pupil could spell their name correctly they would pass. It doesn't so funny anymore.
I know of three people who did poorly at A-Level, got on to soft degree courses, managed to scrape a poor pass and then struggled for years to find any employment because they wanted to walk straight in to a �30k a year job....in the early 90s!
Personally, I'd vote for a two tier system: tier one would be those students who have opted for academic A-Levels, passed an entry test for their university of choice and then gone on to study for a 'proper' degree.
Second tier would be for those who have gone for soft A-Levels and soft degrees (Medya studies, kitchen design, Beckham studies, art etc...).
I believe we have a problem in this country with science students - how can we encourage our current crop of 16 years olds to study science instead of Medya studies and psychology???
When I went it was considered an honour - it strikes me that nowadays, along with so many other things, people consider it a right: which is why we see so many stories that degree holders cannot find work - we have too many university students.
Now personally, having just had a load of plumbing work done at home, if I'd've had the gist of foresight I would have trained to be a plumber! Should we be actively promoting trade apprenticeships?
Personally, I'd vote for a two tier system: tier one would be those students who have opted for academic A-Levels, passed an entry test for their university of choice and then gone on to study for a 'proper' degree.
Second tier would be for those who have gone for soft A-Levels and soft degrees (Medya studies, kitchen design, Beckham studies, art etc...).
I believe we have a problem in this country with science students - how can we encourage our current crop of 16 years olds to study science instead of Medya studies and psychology???
When I went it was considered an honour - it strikes me that nowadays, along with so many other things, people consider it a right: which is why we see so many stories that degree holders cannot find work - we have too many university students.
Now personally, having just had a load of plumbing work done at home, if I'd've had the gist of foresight I would have trained to be a plumber! Should we be actively promoting trade apprenticeships?
edwardian has hit on a very important point - when I did my A-Levels (late 80s) it was the norm for people to take three, with only the very brightest taking four.
Now we read of kids obtaining six, seven, eight A Levels all at A grade. How? I don't believe for a second that kids are intrinsically more intelligent than they were 20 years ago, so surely A Levels must be easier, aren't they?
Now we read of kids obtaining six, seven, eight A Levels all at A grade. How? I don't believe for a second that kids are intrinsically more intelligent than they were 20 years ago, so surely A Levels must be easier, aren't they?
The notion that adademic achievement is the only type worth having has long struck me as a nonsense. We have a situation where school examinations are considered virtually worthless by employers and university degrees are being devalued with each successive year of graduates.
Correspondingly, vocational qualifications are seen as being of lesser value, something I feel is very wrong. Practical skills may be different to accademic ones, but no less valuable to society. We're now in a state where plumbers and electricians are so rare that they command salaries of �50K+. Nice for them, but a bit of a pain for those of us who have to pay for their services in a suppliers' market.
So yes, I do feel that academia should be reserved for those with an apptitude for it, but I also would like to see less emphasis on academic achievement being the be all and end all and greater recognition of the need for and the value of the skills of those who are more practical.
Correspondingly, vocational qualifications are seen as being of lesser value, something I feel is very wrong. Practical skills may be different to accademic ones, but no less valuable to society. We're now in a state where plumbers and electricians are so rare that they command salaries of �50K+. Nice for them, but a bit of a pain for those of us who have to pay for their services in a suppliers' market.
So yes, I do feel that academia should be reserved for those with an apptitude for it, but I also would like to see less emphasis on academic achievement being the be all and end all and greater recognition of the need for and the value of the skills of those who are more practical.
Academic study should be available at no cost (ie, no tuition fees and a return to grants) but to those who are academically able. I use to lecture at a Uni (which was formerly a poly) and students could get on to degree courses with 8 or 10 points at A level. Many students were not up to the demands of some of the courses, so the content would end up being watered down in order that candidates could meet the pass marks. It would be far fairer to offer free university education to all those who meet the criteria. Where I now work, many of our PAs and admin level staff are graduates who cannot get traditional 'graduate level' jobs. As Waldo says, academic achievement is not the be all and end all and it's not for everyone. Working in a 'trade' and serving an apprenticeship should be seen to be equally as worthy as pursuing a (second rate) university education.
It sounds to me that there may be a slight undercurrent of snobbery going on here.
Maybe I'm imagining it but if sounds as if some people feel that their own academic achievements are being devalued by the expansion of degrees into less traditional areas?
What is a degree after all but 3 years (or whatever) of full-time study in a particular subject?
How can you relate the achievement of a 1st class degree in English Literature compared to an Upper Second in Maths?
Heck you can't even reliably compare a lower second in one university to an upper in another if they validate their own degrees?
Or are you supposing that a degree should not involve any actual practical aspect, that you cannot possibly have a degree in furniture making because it invoves actually creating something with your hands.
This notion of seperating and labeling academic or vocational subjects and calling one a degree and one something else only serves to perpetuate an elitism that looks down on manual occupations.
Maybe I'm imagining it but if sounds as if some people feel that their own academic achievements are being devalued by the expansion of degrees into less traditional areas?
What is a degree after all but 3 years (or whatever) of full-time study in a particular subject?
How can you relate the achievement of a 1st class degree in English Literature compared to an Upper Second in Maths?
Heck you can't even reliably compare a lower second in one university to an upper in another if they validate their own degrees?
Or are you supposing that a degree should not involve any actual practical aspect, that you cannot possibly have a degree in furniture making because it invoves actually creating something with your hands.
This notion of seperating and labeling academic or vocational subjects and calling one a degree and one something else only serves to perpetuate an elitism that looks down on manual occupations.
In my industry you don't even get an interview without a decent degree (rightly or wrongly). And in many industrys you are expected to have a degree. Saying that some people I went to uni with I just knew they were going to find it hard to get a decent job not because of their academic grades but other intangables like social skills and confidence. I think that a degree shows the ability to stick at something without somebody breathing down your neck.
i may be being a bit dim here, but isnt that what happens? I thought universitied set their entry and gave you a mark you had to get in your a levels before they would ley you on the course?
And flipflop, there is a two tier system i think, for example cambridge uni wont accept soft subjects as an ebtry point
And flipflop, there is a two tier system i think, for example cambridge uni wont accept soft subjects as an ebtry point
A few weeks ago a local Birmingham newspaper , the Sunday Mercury, published an article about nursing students studying at a local university. As part of their course,before they could qualify, they had to take a mathematics test. I cannot remember the exact percentage of failures, but I am sure that it was in excess of 60 per cent. The nurses who failed had to take an intensive course to improve their mathematical capabilities.I wonder how much that cost ? The newspaper published examples of the questions and they were very basic indeed. I could have answered them at junior school age.
Stay well !
Stay well !
I'm a straight-A student and in 2003 I got a place on a good course at a good university. Every single person on my course had at least three As at A-level. It is true that the best courses do need very strong results. People who get lower results will only be able to go on less popular courses-which are often the less academic courses. But I do not understand why this would bother you.
I would argue that everyone should be permitted to extend their education if they wish to. Young people learn a lot outside of their course at university-there was a huge difference between the youths I met in Freshers week and the young adults that they became by graduation.
If only A-grade students got places at university then the courses would be saturated with public school students and those who are not able to afford to pay for an education at secondary school level would be excluded from university-imagine the social effects this would have on society.
There are many universities that survive by teaching what you call 'soft degrees'- uni's such as Nottingham Trent, UWE, DeMontfort etc etc and think how many jobs are created as a corrolary of these establishments, both in the uni itslef and the cities themselves.
I would argue that everyone should be permitted to extend their education if they wish to. Young people learn a lot outside of their course at university-there was a huge difference between the youths I met in Freshers week and the young adults that they became by graduation.
If only A-grade students got places at university then the courses would be saturated with public school students and those who are not able to afford to pay for an education at secondary school level would be excluded from university-imagine the social effects this would have on society.
There are many universities that survive by teaching what you call 'soft degrees'- uni's such as Nottingham Trent, UWE, DeMontfort etc etc and think how many jobs are created as a corrolary of these establishments, both in the uni itslef and the cities themselves.
Dare I say it but I completely agree with my old sparring partners WaldoMcFroog & Jake-the-Peg.
These days there is far too much emphasis put on gaining a degree no matter in what subjet. There is even talk of reducing the 3 years study time to 2 years. One spokesman agreed that this would be a good idea, because the student would then only have 2 years board, lodgings etc to pay for, so making a saving. He also went on to say that the student would also only have to wait 2 years before he or she got a job. (you could not make this up could you)?
Yes there is alot of snobbery attached to gaining some form of a degree. There has always been this gulf between a Blue Collar Worker and a White Collar Worker, why? i do not know, because under the old Apprentice scheme it took 5 years of study to pass out as a fully qualified Tradesman. How many degrees take that long to study for these days?
I am convinced that all this effort to push youngsters through university, is the Goverments method of keeping the unemployment figures down. What other options are left for youngsters leaving school these days, if it isn't further education?
These days there is far too much emphasis put on gaining a degree no matter in what subjet. There is even talk of reducing the 3 years study time to 2 years. One spokesman agreed that this would be a good idea, because the student would then only have 2 years board, lodgings etc to pay for, so making a saving. He also went on to say that the student would also only have to wait 2 years before he or she got a job. (you could not make this up could you)?
Yes there is alot of snobbery attached to gaining some form of a degree. There has always been this gulf between a Blue Collar Worker and a White Collar Worker, why? i do not know, because under the old Apprentice scheme it took 5 years of study to pass out as a fully qualified Tradesman. How many degrees take that long to study for these days?
I am convinced that all this effort to push youngsters through university, is the Goverments method of keeping the unemployment figures down. What other options are left for youngsters leaving school these days, if it isn't further education?
I must confess there is an element of snobbery here, but these is also a concern that degree holders are 'up to the job'.
In my position I am required to interview potential candidates for graduate level positions and I have in the past, and will continue to do so, discount people who have 'soft' degrees because I know, through experience, that they would not be capable of doing the job being asked of them.
Faced with a Media Studies degree holder or an Economics degree holder, it will always be the latter that will get the interview.
In my position I am required to interview potential candidates for graduate level positions and I have in the past, and will continue to do so, discount people who have 'soft' degrees because I know, through experience, that they would not be capable of doing the job being asked of them.
Faced with a Media Studies degree holder or an Economics degree holder, it will always be the latter that will get the interview.
I think that greater University attendance mirrors our changing economy. More and more so the UK is seeing less and less Primary and Secondary industries (see pit and car plant closures) and more and more Teitiary and service industries (i.e most office jobs) What with the influx of skilled labour from eastern europe this trend is likley to speed up. This is not a government led stratagy but an market enonomics led trend, for instance manufacturing can be done cheaper in the far east and skilled tradsmen from eastern europe charge less for their work.
Most Degrees have never done anything but get you in the door. In the past a degree in say philosophy might have been taken as a good indiction of an analytical mind but was unlikely to be any good to you in your future career.
Your employer was going to have to train you.
Now the employer looks at two applicants one with a degree in a traditional subject like say history and one with a degree in say Management studies.
With businesses under increasing pressure to deliver results quickly - who's he going to pick I wonder?
Your employer was going to have to train you.
Now the employer looks at two applicants one with a degree in a traditional subject like say history and one with a degree in say Management studies.
With businesses under increasing pressure to deliver results quickly - who's he going to pick I wonder?
It's not about snobbery as far as I'm concerned: it's about maintaining higher educational standards by closing the floodgates a little and abandoning degrees that don't appear to be producing high quality candidates. In the real world, all degrees are not equal (many places I've worked at will only recruit candidates with 2.1 or above from red brick unis into exec positions). I feel for the many graduates I know who are stuck in admin level jobs and who cannot seem to get their foot on the first rung of a 'graduate' career because they have found their degree is not valued in the graduate employment arena. Mass higher education has resulted in increased costs and there must be thousands of bright young people out there from the state system who are put off from going to university because of the costs involved. I would have been one of them if I was 18 now so I count my blessings that I had the benefit of a free higher education. Mass higher education also just means that employers will up their criteria when recruiting: how many traditionally non-graduate roles do you see advertised now asking for graduates (eg, recruitment consultant and sales positions)? This just means that in order to do the same job on the same salary that someone would have done 10 or 15 years ago perhaps with good O levels, you now need to have spent 3 years at Uni and got yourself in �20k debt. Mad!
I am degree educated myself and also an employer. I have to say that when interviewing for a job I have virtually no interest in anyone's qualifications, as in the real world I have found perfect morons educated to an allegedly high standard and people who couldn't scrape a CSE in cookery who could run the world single handed.
I like to think that education should be available to all those who wish to pursue it at any level, but we really do need to address the problem of worthless GCSE passes which automatically open the door, whilst someone who might have had a sticky start and not have those passes is refused admission despite the fact they might be more suitable for the course.
It's also interesting to note the amount of spelling and punctuation errors in some of the above posts denigrating the literary abilities of todays applicants. Perhaps some of us aren't as clever as we'd like to think we are :)
I like to think that education should be available to all those who wish to pursue it at any level, but we really do need to address the problem of worthless GCSE passes which automatically open the door, whilst someone who might have had a sticky start and not have those passes is refused admission despite the fact they might be more suitable for the course.
It's also interesting to note the amount of spelling and punctuation errors in some of the above posts denigrating the literary abilities of todays applicants. Perhaps some of us aren't as clever as we'd like to think we are :)
Hello there, Jamesy Boy here! I got a few poor A-Levels in the early 1990's, and dropped out of the local university as I didn't think it would help me in the long run. I feel this decision has been vindicated, and think that too many people are encouraged to go to university regardless of ability. How many call centre workers, etc have degrees?
Quite a few. How many of those people wish they hadn't bothered with higher education and instead learnt a useful trade? Most of them, I suspect.
Quite a few. How many of those people wish they hadn't bothered with higher education and instead learnt a useful trade? Most of them, I suspect.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
ChatterBank40 mins ago
Power Of Social Media Put To Good Use
News53 mins ago
Learn Cpr And First Aid Course In South...
Science180 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles182 mins ago