English Literature Degree Cancelled

[Time Waster]

If a course isn't getting the numbers then why keep it? If it was worth enough to keep there would be the numbers to keep it. Why carry courses which don't attract the numbers to make it viable? My first degree hit cancelled right around the country, you can't do it anywhere despite it once being a highly respected department in the past. I'm all for it with my course and with Sheffield hallam English lit course.

BTW that quote from government minister doesn't mean an English lit course doesn't lead to opportunity and a career. To argue that is to take away all that such a course gives, surely?

It annoys the hell out of me when someone argues that one class of course teaches critical thinking with the implication the other classes don't. It's the typical ignorance of someone who has possibly specialised in arts, humanities or STEM too early to get a balanced education. All good degrees teach critical thought but there's a difference in approach between classes of degrees I reckon.

Jeez the critical thought comment has got me riled more that it should have. I guess I just dislike the pitting of arts, humanities and STEM against each other. Also, I dislike the lack of a wider school education. In my day, probably like today, you tend to see kids through to A level being pushed into a direction. I reckon you'll not get English lit a levels done with maths and further maths a levels for example. You've got to pick which stream you're going into. Imho that leads to division and lack of a wider understanding. I also lament the pitiful STEM understanding in the wider population. I guess it's not as accessible or something.

Sorry, rant over.

 

[chris667]

Sorry, rant over.

What a good-natured rant! The internet would be a much better place if people could disagree so nicely.

I am not attempting to throw stones at STEM subjects. However as someone who has studied law, English and computer science I feel there are "soft" skills humanities students are taught which tend to be dismissed by the teachers of technical subjects.

Incidentally, I would still be doing that as a hobby if the Open University was still affordable.

A computer science graduate who learns to write well has a massive edge over most computer science graduates. I have helped a couple of really, really clever young lads who had no grasp of how to ask for things in business English. Nothing in their education gave them a way into the world of work, but after an evening writing a CV and some cover letters and giving them some proper interview practice (most people who do that professionally are rubbish) they got jobs. One of them is now doing pretty well but I lost touch with the other one.

One of the most valuable skills isn't just the technical (most undergraduates are not very useful straight out of uni, truthfully), but having a good grasp of something technical with an ability to communicate with a non-technical audience. I made a successful career out of that for a while. I'm starting my next career soon and I'll be doing the same thing but in a different field.

The real problem with universities is we take 14 year olds and try to shoehorn them into courses and career paths that might not even exist in the future leaving them to start their working lives with a debt that was enough to buy most of us our first home. And the cynical money-making exercise that foreign students appear to be with a lot of universities. And what we charge the poor buggers for acommodation, food and everything really. University shouldn't be for everyone. I'm glad I didn't go when I was 18; I'd have made a mess of it. To make a mess of it is bad enough but to make a mess of it and have a massive debt afterwards is too much.

The marketing of any sort of degree as a direct entry to a lucrative career which is a lie which we consistently tell all our children is something we ought to be embarrassed about. Yeah, there are a couple of degrees where you are guaranteed entry to a job on completion, but they are not suitable for everyone and we shouldn't pretend they are. We should focus on educating young people to be critical, make their own minds up and be flexible when new opportunities come along. I would even argue the actual subject they study shouldn't even be that important. It misses the point entirely if you think about university as something you do to get a job.

 

[DCLane]

@Time Waster - there's courses and staff involved, with associated history.

I've colleagues who have a course that's been declining in numbers for about ten years, with any revival attempt not working. There are only five colleagues left teaching that subject, rather than the 15 who used to, but it has staffing implications. Any alumni may also feel upset at 'their' course being removed.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Because they’ve been convinced that it’s neither ‘for them’ or ‘useful’.

Possibly, but that just an assumption. We don’t know why pupils are not applying, just that they aren’t.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

The real problem with universities is we take 14 year olds and try to shoehorn them into courses and career paths

Have things changed? When I went to university I was 18. Are many students really being taken on by universities when they are 14?

 

[Sharky]

Just been trawling through the thread about including women in cycling and this made me smile..
"Get yourself a trade, son"

No option for daughters!

I know it's a light hearted thread and no offence intended, but it's easy to see how some things become men only.

 

[chris667]

Have things changed? When I went to university I was 18. Are many students really being taken on by universities when they are 14?

My nephew was being asked to make his GCSE choices at 14 about a year ago. This was done with a view to the degree he'd study. No guidance per se, just lots of questionnaires.

It's not all done in clearing.

 

[wiggydiggy]

I suspect the fact it costs £9k a year in fees is a big factor. If it was free there would be far less pressure from parents and teachers to take “useful degrees”.

I have a BA degree (cost me nothing) it’s not directly connected with my career, but it taught me loads about life, people and how society works.

I also have 2 professional post degree qualifications which are far more valuable career wise, and the skill set i acquired at uni helped with these.

How many graduates immediately end up in a job that’s directly related to their degree? Very few I imagine.

From leaving uni to getting a job that used some of the skills I'd learnt there was a gap of around 6/7 years. Some of that was me just being happy continuing to do any job as I was young and not interested in career chasing, but there was an element of I wasn't actually sure how to apply the skills I'd learnt. I didn't have a clear career in mind when I chose my uni course.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

My nephew was being asked to make his GCSE choices at 14 about a year ago. This was done with a view to the degree he'd study. No guidance per se, just lots of questionnaires.

It's not all done in clearing.

But University applications are not till he’s doing A levels at 16/17. He’s really not being picked by universities at 14. That’s choosing GCSEs where it’s still 6-8 subjects and you really haven’t narrowed down or even had to think much about university choices at that stage. You can still mix humanities and sciences at that stage and decide which direction at A level.

 

[chris667]

I'm not sure if you are deliberately being obtuse, or if you really think that choosing GCSE's, A levels and degrees are not connected.

OK, let's follow your logic and say you're choosing your degree at age 16. Would you be allowed to make any other decision that put you into that much debt in five years time?

 

[wafter]

It's an ironic pushback from the horsesht, business-model-led "everyone can have a degree, even if they're cleaning toilets" that was being pushed in the late '90s; which arguably began the horrendous costs and rot that have blighted higher education ever since

 

[Ming the Merciless]

I'm not sure if you are deliberately being obtuse, or if you really think that choosing GCSE's, A levels and degrees are not connected.

That’s not what I said. Choosing GCSEs isn’t unless you’ve already decided on a very specialist degree like medicine in which case they expect to see Biology GCSE then A level. Otherwise, a number of passes in GCSEs including Maths and English Lang which he’ll have to do, plus more focused A level subjects relevant to the degree will meet the requirements. If the kid has no idea choose the subjects he enjoys at GCSE and it really will not be a handicap.

 

[chris667]

It's an ironic pushback from the horsesht, business-model-led "everyone can have a degree, even if they're cleaning toilets" that was being pushed in the late '90s; which arguably began the horrendous costs and rot that have blighted higher education ever since

Exactly. It's a bloody racket, and worse it is a racket which we trick our kids with.

 

[BoldonLad]

It's an ironic pushback from the horsesht, business-model-led "everyone can have a degree, even if they're cleaning toilets" that was being pushed in the late '90s; which arguably began the horrendous costs and rot that have blighted higher education ever since

If everyone has a degree, then, the "value" of a degree is devalued, it is simple supply and demand. That is, if we assume the "value" of a degree is to obtain more lucrative (ie more highly paid), employment.

IMHO, Education has a "value" in it's own right, regardless of the earning potential, I suppose, this is what we may call "Culture".

Again, IMHO, I think that the Government's motives MAY have been sound, but, as so often with Government Initiatives (regardless of Party), the "slippage" between idea and implementation is significant.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

If everyone has a degree, then, the "value" of a degree is devalued, it is simple supply and demand.

Isn’t this what’s happened since the 1980s. Back then, only around 5% of school leavers went on to university. What’s the percentage now?