Protest!
Sit-ins. Walk-outs. Smashing up the headquarters of a major political party. Chaining yourself to the railings outside your local sweet shop because they changed Marathons to Snickers. How have you stuck it to The Man?
( , Thu 11 Nov 2010, 12:24)
Sit-ins. Walk-outs. Smashing up the headquarters of a major political party. Chaining yourself to the railings outside your local sweet shop because they changed Marathons to Snickers. How have you stuck it to The Man?
( , Thu 11 Nov 2010, 12:24)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
I do see your point
but I think a lot of students know that, and it's part of what causes the anger.
I think the problem is that expanding higher education has meant more and more employers insisting on people having degrees, whether they're needed or not. As a result, if you want an office job nowadays, you realistically do need a degree (in pretty much whatever) with most employers. This causes a vicious circle as an increasing number of people get themselves into debt getting qualifications which they don't especially care for and which don't really drastically improve their career prospects, as everyone's got one - it ends up just helping them to get into jobs they would have got into without degrees if there hadn't been a massive expansion in higher education in the first place.
This is why the economics of charging for degrees becomes pretty questionable: the theory is that you should pay because it will improve your job prospects. Really? I think most degrees won't help that much as more and more people have similar qualifications. We're telling kids they need to go off and get a qualification, and that they have to pay for it because it's going to improve their prospects so much that they will reap all the benefits. I don't think many of them really will.
The difference with something like apprenticeships is pretty clear - if you get a qualification it normally leads directly to a job you will use the skills in and which you wouldn't have got into without the training. We should definitely treat apprenticeships and technical qualifications as being as important to the country's future as degrees - probably more important when they're in professions where there's a shortage of qualified people.
Anyway, back to my thesis on the implications of Lady Gaga for post-modern Feminist theory...
( , Thu 11 Nov 2010, 14:10, Reply)
but I think a lot of students know that, and it's part of what causes the anger.
I think the problem is that expanding higher education has meant more and more employers insisting on people having degrees, whether they're needed or not. As a result, if you want an office job nowadays, you realistically do need a degree (in pretty much whatever) with most employers. This causes a vicious circle as an increasing number of people get themselves into debt getting qualifications which they don't especially care for and which don't really drastically improve their career prospects, as everyone's got one - it ends up just helping them to get into jobs they would have got into without degrees if there hadn't been a massive expansion in higher education in the first place.
This is why the economics of charging for degrees becomes pretty questionable: the theory is that you should pay because it will improve your job prospects. Really? I think most degrees won't help that much as more and more people have similar qualifications. We're telling kids they need to go off and get a qualification, and that they have to pay for it because it's going to improve their prospects so much that they will reap all the benefits. I don't think many of them really will.
The difference with something like apprenticeships is pretty clear - if you get a qualification it normally leads directly to a job you will use the skills in and which you wouldn't have got into without the training. We should definitely treat apprenticeships and technical qualifications as being as important to the country's future as degrees - probably more important when they're in professions where there's a shortage of qualified people.
Anyway, back to my thesis on the implications of Lady Gaga for post-modern Feminist theory...
( , Thu 11 Nov 2010, 14:10, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread