Maths

[Jobbo]

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.

I'm not sure if 'when it was actually good' was my era in the 1990s when we didn't have heating or more recently but I assume 90s if she's your sort of age. So she's around 50 now. I think the intervening ~30 years is more relevant to her job prospects now than what or where she studied when she was 18-21.

[Explosive Newt]

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!

Engineering then... architecture involves a long slog getting postgraduate qualifications so certainly isn't a route to a quick buck.

Do the parents in the thread feel they are failing their children if they don't push them towards a more financially sustainable course? (not tongue in cheek, genuinely interested to know)

[Explosive Newt]

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.

Oxford physics is ok at the moment. A lot of the first year is in coding and doing complex in silico experiments. Sets you up nicely to become a Trader when you leave (and quite a few do).

Academia is hard work and you do it for reasons other than money! If I had been a straight clinical consultant with a private practice chunk I would be making about twice what I do now. I'm comfortable right now, but the grant funding cycle is precarious.

ETA: I asked a colleague about this and his response was "the Oxford physics course wasn't very good before 1900 but it's steadily improved over the last century"

[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!

Engineering then... architecture involves a long slog getting postgraduate qualifications so certainly isn't a route to a quick buck.

Do the parents in the thread feel they are failing their children if they don't push them towards a more financially sustainable course? (not tongue in cheek, genuinely interested to know)

I feel like you've failed them if you havent explained there are many many ways to earn a living and academia isn't some definite road to success. Every career has pitfalls so choose what you think is best.

There is a lot to be said for having passion in what you do but also doing something you don't enjoy if it funds what you do enjoy.

I certainly won't be pushing them to a degree but they do need a plan of some sort and then we will help them as much as is sensible.

Dave!

[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.

I'm not sure if 'when it was actually good' was my era in the 1990s when we didn't have heating or more recently but I assume 90s if she's your sort of age. So she's around 50 now. I think the intervening ~30 years is more relevant to her job prospects now than what or where she studied when she was 18-21.

If she was clever then she's still clever now.

[Rich B]

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.

I'm not sure if 'when it was actually good' was my era in the 1990s when we didn't have heating or more recently but I assume 90s if she's your sort of age. So she's around 50 now. I think the intervening ~30 years is more relevant to her job prospects now than what or where she studied when she was 18-21.

If she was clever then she's still clever now.

What does she do for a career?

[Broccers]

I'm not sure if 'when it was actually good' was my era in the 1990s when we didn't have heating or more recently but I assume 90s if she's your sort of age. So she's around 50 now. I think the intervening ~30 years is more relevant to her job prospects now than what or where she studied when she was 18-21.

If she was clever then she's still clever now.

What does she do for a career?

Maths.

[mik]

If she was clever then she's still clever now.

What does she do for a career?

Maths.

Figures.

[Rich B]

If she was clever then she's still clever now.

What does she do for a career?

Maths.

No wonder she can’t get a job…

[Broccers]

What does she do for a career?

Maths.

Figures.

That was clever.

[Explosive Newt]

I was talking to a visiting lecturer from Lincoln at dinner last night. He’s a historian and his take was that a history degree at Lincoln probably provides more ‘value add’ than one at Cambridge. Ie most of their applicants come from more deprived backgrounds and therefore gain a lot more from a degree (generically but also in terms of critical thinking) than the average Cambridge applicant who was always going to do well.

[Jobbo]

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.

I'm not sure if 'when it was actually good' was my era in the 1990s when we didn't have heating or more recently but I assume 90s if she's your sort of age. So she's around 50 now. I think the intervening ~30 years is more relevant to her job prospects now than what or where she studied when she was 18-21.

If she was clever then she's still clever now.

Being clever doesn't make you employable. 30 years' employment is what is useful to an employer.