University, huh, yeah What is it good for Absolutely nothing

[Gibbon]

My point is how do you know what you've missed?
8 weeks is just about enough to train someone in a language - I doubt there's anything deep about algorithmic theory, NP-complete problems, building a virtual computer from scratch, AI techniques, data mining, statistical and machine learning etc etc.

Well it's stood me good for:

Missile aiming
Radar tracking and doppler filtering
Air traffic management
Jet engine control
Navigation solutions
Data Fusion

[MarillionFan]

Well it's stood me good for:

Missile aiming
Radar tracking and doppler filtering
Air traffic management
Jet engine control
Navigation solutions
Data Fusion

You work on the door at Tescos now don't you?

[sasguru]

Well it's stood me good for:

Missile aiming
Radar tracking and doppler filtering
Air traffic management
Jet engine control
Navigation solutions
Data Fusion

8 weeks to cover all that - impressive

[Gibbon]

8 weeks to cover all that - impressive

Sarky!

8 weeks real time programming course. I was already a Radar Tech, the others are areas I've worked in since leaving 12 years ago.

And no I don't claim to be an expert in any; merely competent enough to understand the requirements and produce a solution that is maintainable and works.

My point being that a computer degree isn't necessary for the general mass of computer type jobs.

[Scoi]

Who defines what's useful?

And is what is defined as useful fixed?

For example some orchestras a while ago where complaining about not having enough quality musicians.

And I know people with music degrees from some of the top music schools (where you study other subjects like languages) who now teach in Primary schools.

While they needed A levels their main way of getting on their courses was an audition.

It would be a difficult task in some instances but achievable if the immigration team work with the education team. If we are shipping in dentists and engineers make them free. In my uni an engineering lecture followed a sociology one. 500 people left the theatre, 80 entered. It's pretty obvious we don't need 6 times the number of sociologist in this country than we do engineers.

The good thing about the increased tuition fees is that it will reduce the number of people going for pointless degrees. Partly due to the fact that they aren't clever enough to realise the increased fees and new structure will mean its cheaper for them in the new system than the old. It should also push up the wages and rates in the useful industries as a whole and therefore attract more into useful degrees.

[BS1397]

It was actually John Major who started the mess by changing Polys to Unis.

Polys weren't meant to churn out people with Meeja Studies degrees, they were aimed at churning out people with useful skills and qualifications for industry.

The traditional unis were there to churn out people with qualifications that may not be useful to industry.

This was going on well before J.M. Even back in the mid~late 70s the lobbying was underway as I remember my lecturers were moaning about not being equal in status (cash) to their university counterparts, I still agree with them on that point but the messy thing it turned out makes me wish it never happened.

I agree totally, A poly was there to give practical skills on top of the high quality technical academic knowledge. Meejia & Soci-ology was a minor distraction to fill empty courses for wannabe local misfits (I feel quite pompous this morning being a Friday).

[TimberWolf]

It's a money making racket. Although I gather if you are on low pay, a degree can still be bought quite cheaply.

[Scoobos]

Those with rigorous degrees from good unis probably have no problem. Those with crap degrees from ex-polys probably do. Which is as it should be, TBH. It's only Labour's silly conceit that everyone is equal that led to high expectations.

Oi!

I went to a poly, which had the best IT school in the country (at the time 93-95); I did alright, but still had to work my way up to a decent job with a string of horrid ones.

I would say though, that polys were a good thing - if we had anything left in the UK that utilised practical skills, we'd need them back.

Our current model of churning out "office workers" or call centre engineers, in a 1 size fits all or you are a failure education system; seems to be working brilliantly at demoralising millions of people.

[SueEllen]

Tricky one but there would just have to be some part of the education department in the government doing it. How they reach their decision would hopefully be

Civil servants are out of touch you don't want them doing it unless they do it by looking at the figures for courses.

Even then they muck up if it's not done with all the relevant departments.

When they increased the number of places for medicine a few years back, the NHS didn't increase the number of training posts. So when the students graduated they couldn't get the training they needed and some went aboard.

If someone young and degree qualified goes abroad to another western country, there is a good chance they won't be back.

Musical courses are normally about musical theory and history rather about performance though, aren't they?

I was under the impression that people with this flair studied privately and worked their way up through the grade system and any orchestra would logically insist on an audition (we certainly do) regardless of anyone's academic achievement.

Nope. They do study performance.

There are a lot of grade 8 musicians around particularly in people from a strongly middle class background.

If you see one of your mates playing who has a grade 8 who hasn't gone onto study music and someone who has there is a difference in their performance.

Mainly because the person who has gone to study music lives, eats and breaths it for 4 years.

Also depending on the instrument (I'm including the voice and conducting ) they need to learn other skills. So in the case of languages if you are going to sing/conduct an opera it helps to understand and speak the language the opera is in.

There might well be a lack of quality musicians, however I would guess that this is more due to the expense of instruments and the various, more attractive, alternate ways to spend time for youngsters rather than spending several hours practicing. I would not be suprised if other, more difficult skills, are also dying off.

The price of instruments is never a problem as beginners don't need fancy instruments.

Remember there were mining bands, and miners earned SFA. If they could afford to get a brass instrument to learn on and play then anyone can.

The issue is in the state sector, arts including music and sport are seen as an add on with no direct value to the economy. Due to league tables there is no benefit in having arts and sport in your school. So when there were funding cuts in education these are the first things to go.

Parents don't tend to think of allowing their kid to learn an instrument if they don't play one themselves, so unless they come back from school showing they have enjoyed it then the parent isn't going to put their hand in their pocket or find out how their kid can do more of it.

There are plenty of kids, from all backgrounds, who would happy sit for hours playing music and practising particularly if they can perform to someone afterwards. Even in the kids that don't being able to create something improves their concentration skills that helps in other subjects.

[Scoobos]

Post of the day so far ^^^

Dish out some rep.