• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Degree ? Waste Of Time

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #61
    Originally posted by madhippy
    me too - but I couldn't think of a decent counter-comeback.
    You would have if you had a degree.

    Comment


      #62
      Originally posted by Denny
      You would have if you had a degree.
      I have ... hence the "me too" in my previous post!

      Comment


        #63
        Originally posted by madhippy
        me too - but I couldn't think of a decent counter-comeback.
        There you go. Proof that a degree kills creativity.

        Comment


          #64
          The government is making degrees worthless

          Their target of 50% getting a degree basically means everyone of average intelligence will get one, simple as that.

          Except it gets worse, bright kids from poor backgrounds will work that out for themselves and not go, especially as you are looking at around £30k debt soon. So now to get 50% you have to include those of below average intelligence.

          Degrees now don't differentiate, so employers will fall back even more on selecting those from 'better' universities. Variable top-up fees mean that only rich kids get degrees from those universities.

          Voila, back where we were decades ago, thick rich kids get the qualifications that get them a better job. Welcome to Bliar and Brownstuffs version of equal opportunities for all.

          Comment


            #65
            Originally posted by bfg
            Their target of 50% getting a degree basically means everyone of average intelligence will get one, simple as that.

            Except it gets worse, bright kids from poor backgrounds will work that out for themselves and not go, especially as you are looking at around £30k debt soon. So now to get 50% you have to include those of below average intelligence.

            Degrees now don't differentiate, so employers will fall back even more on selecting those from 'better' universities. Variable top-up fees mean that only rich kids get degrees from those universities.

            Voila, back where we were decades ago, thick rich kids get the qualifications that get them a better job. Welcome to Bliar and Brownstuffs version of equal opportunities for all.
            That's a good analysis. You must have a degree.

            Comment


              #66
              Originally posted by white-anglo-reactionary
              . Nurture will nearly always win out over nature.
              Wrong. Modern science is increasingly proving otherwise. Much as it comforts people to think they have control over their lives, unfortunately they don't. Good genes are the order of the day.

              Toodle pip!
              Hard Brexit now!
              #prayfornodeal

              Comment


                #67
                Looking at the cost of a degree I wonder why people study "meeja studees" or even physics, when most of what is learnt is not relevant. I've never used the Quantum Physics, Theoretical Magneto-Hydrodynamics, Solid State Physics etc that I learnt. Not even the maths. And the computing was tulipe. Badly taught and out-dated. I suspect that a degree serves to further the little empires of academics. To create work for them, and generate a pool from which to select Ph.D. candidates, a small proportion of which will go on to become fully fledged academics.

                Many say that a degree trains you to think. Well I am not so sure. What do academics know about non-academic thinking.

                It seems odd that a young person is willing to pay £50K or whatever it is to obtain a qualification in a semi-abstract subject. Surely they would do far better to spend one year on an intense vocational qualification. In 1 year you could learn an awful lot of relevant IT: a decent programming language such as C, C++ or C#, some database basics, some GUI basics and so on. Combine that with work experience spread over two years and surely that would be a really strong training. And you could earn a bit to partially cover the cost of the learning.

                Comment


                  #68
                  Originally posted by Fungus
                  What do academics know about non-academic thinking.
                  No such thing as academic thinking or non-academic thinking. Only logical thinking.
                  Hard Brexit now!
                  #prayfornodeal

                  Comment


                    #69
                    Originally posted by zeitghost
                    Working as I do (for the moment) in eyer edjukashun, I was mildly stunned this week to be asked by a 2nd year student "wos the difference between a transistor & a diode"...

                    So I told him: "diodes have two legs and transistors have three".

                    He seemed satified with this answer which is even more frightening...

                    And this clown managed to pass 1st year exams in electronics...
                    Hey ZG we're doomed. Not sure that I give a tulip though
                    Hard Brexit now!
                    #prayfornodeal

                    Comment


                      #70
                      Originally posted by sasguru
                      No such thing as academic thinking or non-academic thinking. Only logical thinking.
                      You must have a degree to come up with an insight like that.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X