Maths

[Explosive Newt]

When universities were 'free' far fewer went. I suspect we could go back to that model with the same %age of grads, or we can have 50%+ going to uni and having to pay.

There was decision in the Blair government to use Universities as an engine of social mobility. A university education (definitely then, to some extent now) would move you up social classes, so the obvious solution to make the population better off was to send 50% of them to uni. The only way to do that was to make people pay for their education.
Now we are in a situation where universities have expanded dramatically, which has devalued the cost of degrees offered and also means sustaining the university sector financially is a huge challenge.

We are also in a position where university inflation has led to an arms race where degrees, diplomas, etc are necessary for certain jobs. Certainly in my own sector, posts that once would have been appointed to based on experience (teaching, running trials, etc) now require a PGDip or Masters. This is sustained by universities who need to create and run masters courses (and ideally sell them to international students) to keep up financially.

Personally, I think we need to see a contraction of the university sector and a bit of a reset, but how we reset the job requirements I don't know. There is a risk that all these postgraduate masters courses are going to flounder as you either have rigorous standards or you explain to people that just paying £30,000 doesn't guarantee you a pass.

In terms of the original argument - some of our undergrads are sold very optimistic projections of their earning post qualification (in order to lure them in) and find themselves struggling afterwards. I agree with others that there is a degree (no pun intended) of conflation as many of them are upset that they are £64,000 in debt when previous generations got a grant.

[Broccers]

The thread is about Maths.

[Rich B]

The thread is about Maths.

Shhhh Broccers, you’ve accidentally made an interesting thread.

[IanF]

I do think it’s wrong to have to pay for education, but also believe far too many people go to university.

Some interesting insights here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyegp0dnq9o

[IanF]

The thread is about Maths.

Shhhh Broccers, you’ve accidentally made an interesting thread.

[Broccers]

The thread is about Maths.

Shhhh Broccers, you’ve accidentally made an interesting thread.

What's up Richard? Not getting attention? Aww.

[Broccers]

Getting back to the topic in hand which was essentially money. I honestly do feel sorry for the yoof of today. But saying this their parents could encourage them to be savvy and understand compound interest.

[Explosive Newt]

The thread is about Maths.

It's the internet. We just talk about what we know.

[Simon]

When universities were 'free' far fewer went. I suspect we could go back to that model with the same %age of grads, or we can have 50%+ going to uni and having to pay.

There was decision in the Blair government to use Universities as an engine of social mobility. A university education (definitely then, to some extent now) would move you up social classes, so the obvious solution to make the population better off was to send 50% of them to uni. The only way to do that was to make people pay for their education.
Now we are in a situation where universities have expanded dramatically, which has devalued the cost of degrees offered and also means sustaining the university sector financially is a huge challenge.

We are also in a position where university inflation has led to an arms race where degrees, diplomas, etc are necessary for certain jobs. Certainly in my own sector, posts that once would have been appointed to based on experience (teaching, running trials, etc) now require a PGDip or Masters. This is sustained by universities who need to create and run masters courses (and ideally sell them to international students) to keep up financially.

Personally, I think we need to see a contraction of the university sector and a bit of a reset, but how we reset the job requirements I don't know. There is a risk that all these postgraduate masters courses are going to flounder as you either have rigorous standards or you explain to people that just paying £30,000 doesn't guarantee you a pass.

In terms of the original argument - some of our undergrads are sold very optimistic projections of their earning post qualification (in order to lure them in) and find themselves struggling afterwards. I agree with others that there is a degree (no pun intended) of conflation as many of them are upset that they are £64,000 in debt when previous generations got a grant.

Agree with all of this.

Mito's earlier reply to my point is that an increasing number of jobs now require degrees, but really, which came first, the increasing number of ppl going to uni or the number of jobs requiring degrees? Because if you need 'the best of the best' then you need a way to filter out those people, and that gets harder as everyone goes to uni.

The other point that's well made is that lots of companies require a degree simply because they think that'll get them the best candidate, whereas in reality lots of roles don't really _need_ a degree qualified person, and it's taken up to very recently for some companies to start to acknowledge this.

I didn't go to uni - my older brother did. I helped recruit him into the cloud company I worked at 18 months after I joined it. So what benefit was going to uni? Well, apart from meeting his now wife I suppose...

The final point is that middle earners in this country have seen their real world pay absolutely stagnant for the last 15-20 years. Sure, average wages are up, but that's mostly from the minimum wage and the highest earners. Those in the middle - doing skilled 'degree level' work have practically one backwards in real-world terms. Something has to change.

[jamcg]

You're walking into a financial agreement with a student loan and ironically the kids are not savvy enough to understand the consequences.

My boy's got a place in Uni studying Economics but he's wavering because, Ironically, his economics understanding it telling him it's a bad idea. He's looking at Degree Apprentice Schemes now which seem like a far better option if he can secure one.

I can’t speak for a degree apprenticeship as such but as someone who went school-6th form-university-drop out-gas apprenticeship I can confirm apprenticeship is a great way to learn as you get to apply your new knowledge on the daily, you don’t leave education as a highly qualified but ultimately real world clueless individual, you leave with qualifications and experience. And you can’t teach experience it has to be, well, experienced

[dinny_g]

In our place, they do 3 years working a rotation in everything from HR to IT, Customer Services to Sales and Marketing. They get paid decent money and end with a Chartered Degree in Business Management from Cranfield University, make connections and have Zero Debt. I think Barclaycard in Northampton do similar (although their Degree is through Northampton Uni)

I'd agree on IT Uni Grads - not worth the paper. IF you're looking for a person to mould in the IT world, Maths Graduates are the best in my experience

[Jobbo]

The thread is about Maths.

That's certainly the thread title, but it's not what your original post is about

I was surprised to find that basically anything requires a degree these days; nursing for instance, a career which is sufficiently low-paid to basically guarantee you're never going to repay your whole student loan. Out of that low pay you lose 9%. That's utterly shit.

There are certain degrees where you get a financial incentive - teaching for instance with the Golden Hello scheme: https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -academies
Socially that's probably a good thing, though plenty of people went into teaching before it existed and it's no longer the low-paid career it once was (I well remember the teachers' strikes of the 1980s).

When student loans were first introduced - in my final year at university, 1994-95 - the interest was set at the rate of inflation. There were people I knew who took them and invested them to make a return. Very canny. I don't think setting the interest rate at more than the rate of inflation is wrong in principle to avoid this type of behaviour, and ~4% inflation with ~7% interest rates seems there or thereabouts correct in purely financial terms. But I'm not sure maths is something Broccers actually wants to discuss.

[Broccers]

Turned into a decent discussion but it is essentially about maths.

[Explosive Newt]

Mito's earlier reply to my point is that an increasing number of jobs now require degrees, but really, which came first, the increasing number of ppl going to uni or the number of jobs requiring degrees? Because if you need 'the best of the best' then you need a way to filter out those people, and that gets harder as everyone goes to uni.

The other point that's well made is that lots of companies require a degree simply because they think that'll get them the best candidate, whereas in reality lots of roles don't really _need_ a degree qualified person, and it's taken up to very recently for some companies to start to acknowledge this.

Indeed. I think the (a) problem is that many professions or roles, while they do not need a degree, have so many applicants who have undertaken a degree to make themselves more competitive for the role that we go past a tipping point where you struggle to compete if you didn't have one.

I was surprised to find that basically anything requires a degree these days; nursing for instance, a career which is sufficiently low-paid to basically guarantee you're never going to repay your whole student loan. Out of that low pay you lose 9%. That's utterly shit.

I think that was an attempt to professionalise nursing, and certainly the numbers of nurses moving into specialist roles has increased (potentially part of the move to reduce NHS costs by reassigning jobs exclusively done by doctors but that is another story) but whether that is a sequelae of creating band 5 nurses who are over-qualified is questionable. Certainly putting yourself into degree debt then being a band 5 nurse your whole life is a waste.

I would argue that the concepts taught at nursing school amount to a professionalisation of something which didn't really need to be professionalised, which I think is the theme of many of these degrees. Perhaps you drive up quality but there were probably better ways of doing that and the overall benefits are minimal.

The thread is about Maths.

But that said, I fully ascribe to the belief that you learn more than just your degree at university and there is truth in the social mobility message but also I would genuinely love to spend 3 years studying literature or philosophy or something else that I find really interesting but don't expect to improve my earning potential.

[Broccers]

It's a rough market out there for Jobs apparently. My far more intelligent sister who got a physics degree at Oxford when it was actually good is struggling to find employment.

[Broccers]

Making money from opportunities. The bounce back loans at 2.5 percent on 50k were exactly that. All about understanding the maths.

[Gavster]

The alogrithm has been eating my cookies becauase Oggy popped up on TikTok talking about this

To summarise:

Child 1: Completed 3 year degree, £48k in debt, no job.
Child 2: 1 year at uni, £14k in debt, did a fast-track diploma type thing and got a job


https://www.tiktok.com/@oggyboysming/vi ... 8421562626

[Gavster]

Also the mental thing when I was considering a PhD was the ROI on the time and money. So many post-docs earning pretty basic salaries with very little chance of career progression after years and years of austerity. I love the subject and would do a PhD for free, but I also want to earn enough money to enjoy life too and social sciences aren't renowned for their high earning potential

[Swervin_Mervin]

Something I've wondered recently - as the first of those who had to pay for their degrees have kids that are approaching 18, I wonder if we'll see a drop in numbers going to uni. I can well imagine there'll be many put off by any long-standing negative views of their parents towards the debt they were saddled with, or possibly might still even have.

[V8Granite]

Unless my kids have a specific need for a degree in their chosen field then I won't be funding it.

My eldest wants to do something around history as he is really enjoying the subject but no idea where that may take him.

My youngest wants to be involved in bridge or plane design as "buildings are boring and trucks can't drive on them" so if he needs a degree for that then fine.

I won't be funding a 3 year float about party in a random degree.

Dave!