Too Many Graduates

[Harrowby Hall]

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development states that the majority of graduates are working injobs that do not require a degree. Nearly 60% of graduates are working in jobs that do not require a degree.

I worked for over 20 years in the Business School of an HE institution that became a university. I took it upon myself to warn students of the realities of being a graduate - in particular, the fact that the first job they would do would almost certainly be one which anyone, regardless of qualifications, could do.

This naturally upset them. I pointed out that the skills they were acquiring would fit them not for their first job, probably not for their next job, but perhaps the one after. They were learning the skills of management not operations.

As far as operations was concerned, they were warned that the first thing they would hear from their boss when they did start work would be "We don't do it that way here."

Among other things, I taught what are called "quantitave methods" - statistics, business mathematics, operations research and so on. "Why are we doing this?" came the cry. "I'm going to do Personnel (or Marketing or Tourism etc)." They frequently came back from their work experience year wishing they had taken the subject more seriously.

I think that the CIPD has got it half right. A university education should not be considered to be training for employment but the acquisition of skills for life. Vocationally based education is essential for some jobs (medicine, law, engineering) but most students choose subjects which do not appear to have any vocational relevence. Do English students all become novelists or History students all become historians?

The important skills should be present in all degree subjects: the ability to analyse and evaluate information, the ability to reach conclusions based on the analysis of information, the ablility to present information to others and to persuade others of the appropriateness of decisions, and so on. These are the skills required of senior managers, operational skills are less important. Having a degree - in any subject - should should be a tool which an ambitious individual can use to reach their potential.

As it happens, however, I do think that we are producing too many graduates. Tony Blair stated he wanted to see 50% of school leavers going to university. I think he was wrong or that he expressed his intention badly. The ability required to succeed at university is not possessed by all school leavers. Blair should have been more general about post-compulsory educational experience. Perhaps he was more concerned with reducing headline measures of unemployment.

I think that the most essential area of education for our economy is one which, in the past, was a jewel in the educational crown: the FE colleges, the local "tech". They provided the opportunity for lifetime learning and for retraining. They promoted flexibility in the workforce and opportunities for personal development. However, a government system which sees the development of cost accounting as the highest cultural and intellectual achievement of humanity is squeezing HE out of existence.

We are producing too many graduates - but not for the reason given by CIPD.


(Mods - if you feel that this is better suited to Politics then feel free to move it.)

[Rhiannon]

I think there are all kinds of reasons why we have too many graduates. I don't have any direct experience, mind, but I know people in both business and the public sector who are experiencing problems. Some careers that used to be open to all are now graduate professions, nursing being an obvious example. A senior nurse my mum knows says that this means the right candidates aren't coming through.

Blair's 50% seemed so unfair - it gave the impression that 50% of our young people couldn't do white collar work. That some of those degrees were in pop music (my cousin has a degree in that and now works in IT) or in grass management for golf courses (an acquaintance of my ex has that one) is neither here nor there.

I know that my eldest will read English and I'll encourage her to do that as it is her gift and her passion. It's possible she will indeed write for her career but if not (or as well as) there's a strong possibility she'll teach it, and I wouldn't be surprised if her younger sister did the same. But then their idea of a holiday treat is to be dropped off at the library for the day.

[Shaker]

I was that child, Rhi 

[ProfessorDavey]

I was thinking about this on the way into work (a university!!) this morning.

I am interested in the term 'require a degree' and to think of this in a historical context too. There are some professions where there is a clear requirement for a degree, and indeed a particular degree as this is part of the training in that profession. Good examples being Law, Medicine and Engineering. What you learn in the degree is directly relevant to the profession and I'm sure you wouldn't want to be seen by a doctor without a medical degree (even if they have another degree).

But there are (and have always been) loads of jobs where a degree is 'required' but in reality this is merely a proxy for quality of candidate and some measure of intellectual quality. So all those graduate entry schemes into major private companies, and also into civil service etc. They require a degree, but in many cases what was learned in that degree is entirely irrelevant to the job. And probably people without a degree (but the right attitude, application etc) would have been able to do it just as well, yet the degree was a 'requirement'.

So for decades a degree was often a minimum requirement to be able to enter a profession at a particular level (not necessarily a requirement for doing the job). It allowed firms to easily sift out people and reduce their pool of applicants. And I think the same is true.

Remember there is a market out there - if you can take someone with a degree it is likely you will do - so perhaps the question is being asked the wrong way around. Rather than say we have too many graduate, perhaps we should be considering the consequences for the individual if they don't have a degree within our current jobs market. It is easy to say we should have less graduates, but in a market where there are many, many graduates those without a degree are at a distinct disadvantage.

As an aside, on the topic of 'mickey mouse' degrees - I think this is a rather out of date view - since the introduction of fees in the first place, and even more so with the increase to £9k students are increasingly choosing 'traditional' subjects for their degrees. If they are stacking up large debts they are increasingly savvy at realising they need a degree at the end that everyone has heard of and is eminently 'saleable' - so golf course studies is out, mechanical engineering is in.

[Rhiannon]

Shaker, me too, but unlike them I didn't get the opportunity to do anything with it. Learning for learning's sake wasn't encouraged and I was shoe-horned into subjects aimed at getting me to follow my mother into business. I was bored out of my brain and dropped out even before I took my a levels. I guess that's why with my own kids I want them to follow their passions - it gives them a greater chance of success and they (hopefully) won't keep looking back and thinking, if only - which is what I do.

[Rhiannon]

PD, I agree about the trivial subjects - an issue under Blair but not so much now.

I believe you can train for law and also accountancy through specialised schemes that allow you to train as you go. It's not very well publicised though.

[Rhiannon]

Law Society stuff here.

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/law-careers/becoming-a-solicitor/routes-to-qualifying/

[ProfessorDavey]

PD, I agree about the trivial subjects - an issue under Blair but not so much now.

I believe you can train for law and also accountancy through specialised schemes that allow you to train as you go. It's not very well publicised though.

Indeed although it is certainly challenging for example to qualify as a lawyer without a degree.

But that's kind of the reverse of my point - to qualify as a lawyer you need specialist training as a lawyer and most people get that within a law degree - what they learn is directly related to their future profession.

That isn't always the case and was never always the case. So go back decades when some of the 'top' employers had graduate programmes, that not only required you to have a degree but also limited candidates by university they studied at. Back in the 80s I remember a friend of mine applying for a graduate training programme at a major employer who was rejected and in the letter the company specifically told him that he was not being considered because the company was satisfied with its Oxbridge graduates. Did the job actually require a degree (this was in retailing management), well actually not and the training programme was extensive. Did a Oxford classics graduate have essential direct skills for the job - nope. The degree and the university were simply used as a proxy for 'quality' and more importantly as an approach to make the graduate training programme exclusive and restrictive.

[Nearly Sane]

Most of a law degree is a waste of time as regards becoming a lawyer

[Rhiannon]

Go back further still to the sixties when my mother (parents both East End factory workers) left her grammar school at 16 because her family couldn't afford for her not to. She took a job with the civil service that allowed her to fast track her A levels by attending college for two days a week. After working her way up she left for the private sector, joining an international company and eventually becoming their first UK partner. By the time she left she was head of one of their international divisions and was the only one in her entire department without a degree - or any initials after her name. Could that happen now?

[Hope]

BBC Breakfast ran an interesting item this morning on the 43rd WorldSkills Competition that was held in Sao Paolo recently https://www.worldskills.org/what/competitions/wsc2015/

Sometimes referred to as the 'vocational Olympics' apparently, several people said that this was far more important than the sporting equivalent.

As an educator, I have long felt that university isn't the be-all and end-all that some politicians (especially, but not exclusively Labour politicians) like to make out.  Often society depends more on the lowest-paid than on the highest paid.  For instance, whilst doctors have an important role to play in the health of our society, it can be argued that dustbin men, sewage workers and street cleaners have a greater impact on the foundational level of society's health than any doctor.

I believe that we need to get back to valuing apprentices and the schemes that prepare them for work far more than we currently do.

[ProfessorDavey]

Go back further still to the sixties when my mother (parents both East End factory workers) left her grammar school at 16 because her family couldn't afford for her not to. She took a job with the civil service that allowed her to fast track her A levels by attending college for two days a week. After working her way up she left for the private sector, joining an international company and eventually becoming their first UK partner. By the time she left she was head of one of their international divisions and was the only one in her entire department without a degree - or any initials after her name. Could that happen now?

Could that happen now?

Yes I think it could, but it would be rare - just as it was rare then.

[Hope]

By the time she left she was head of one of their international divisions and was the only one in her entire department without a degree - or any initials after her name. Could that happen now?

I would go further than PD.  I'd say that it definitely could.  There are a surprising number of examples of this kind of thing, not to mention owners of companies, who have no degree - in some cases, no formal qualifications.

[Udayana]

Whatever happened to the idea of being "over qualified"? That was the typical response I had when looking for jobs back in the 1970's, before I found out what I really wanted to do.

Is there anything needing to be done about the current situation?

[ProfessorDavey]

By the time she left she was head of one of their international divisions and was the only one in her entire department without a degree - or any initials after her name. Could that happen now?

I would go further than PD.  I'd say that it definitely could.  There are a surprising number of examples of this kind of thing, not to mention owners of companies, who have no degree - in some cases, no formal qualifications.

I think there is a difference for company owners, where this is often a company set up by the person. If you've set up that company and own it and don't have a degree, you will necessarily be a non-degree holding company owner.

I think Rhi was talking about the ability to move up within an existing organisation right to the top level without a degree - whether large private companies, the public sector or third stream. And it isn't impossible but rare, and I think it always was rare but not impossible.

Actually using these people as 'examples' to young kids considering their futures isn't great. Why because although there are exceptions that prove the rule, so to speak, the vast, vast majority of those at the top in organisations are degree holders. Kids need to realise that deciding not to study for a degree will close doors, will reduce choices in their future careers and life. They might still success without a degree, but the evidence suggests that the route to a top job (well paid, highly motivating, with prospects and choice) usually starts with studying for a degree, and achieving a good degree.

[Hope]

Whatever happened to the idea of being "over qualified"?

It's alive and kicking, Ud. Few, if any employers are willing to pay me at the level my qualifications and experience suggest.  For instance, when I was first taken on by my last employer (an FE college - teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages)) I was placed on the lowest level of the ladder (MG1).  They stated that I would remain there until I had gained a PGCE.  When I pointed out that I qualified as a teacher with a B.Ed. in 1979 and have since gained an MA in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, they raised me to MG2!!  "MG3 and above will come with length of service", apparently.  Even ordinary schools pay people more in line with their qualifications.

[Udayana]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315
 

[Harrowby Hall]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315

Sriram says that this doesn't exist.

[Sriram]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315

Sriram says that this doesn't exist.

On the contrary...I was about to start a thread on this subject.  In India we have too many people passing out of colleges (engineering no less) with very few jobs..let alone suitable jobs.   Most have no jobs...and many have unsuitable jobs.

This nonsense of getting everyone to take a college degree doesn't make sense somehow. There should be vocational training and people should be given suitable jobs after school.

[Hope]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315

Sriram says that this doesn't exist.

I doubt whether Sri can know the exact situation of all 1.3-odd billion Indians.

[Rhiannon]

By the time she left she was head of one of their international divisions and was the only one in her entire department without a degree - or any initials after her name. Could that happen now?

I would go further than PD.  I'd say that it definitely could.  There are a surprising number of examples of this kind of thing, not to mention owners of companies, who have no degree - in some cases, no formal qualifications.

I think there is a difference for company owners, where this is often a company set up by the person. If you've set up that company and own it and don't have a degree, you will necessarily be a non-degree holding company owner.

I think Rhi was talking about the ability to move up within an existing organisation right to the top level without a degree - whether large private companies, the public sector or third stream. And it isn't impossible but rare, and I think it always was rare but not impossible.

Actually using these people as 'examples' to young kids considering their futures isn't great. Why because although there are exceptions that prove the rule, so to speak, the vast, vast majority of those at the top in organisations are degree holders. Kids need to realise that deciding not to study for a degree will close doors, will reduce choices in their future careers and life. They might still success without a degree, but the evidence suggests that the route to a top job (well paid, highly motivating, with prospects and choice) usually starts with studying for a degree, and achieving a good degree.

You couldn't use my mum as an example now - I doubt very much whether her entry job at 16 (these days 18 would be the very minimum) to the civil service is now non-graduate, let alone the old schemes whereby young people could earn, learn on the job and continue their academic education. Yes, it was unusual for her to get as high as she did, but it wasn't so unusual for someone who didn't go to university or complete their FE at school to get a good career. I'll be encouraging my kids to get degrees because the opportunities for non-grads are far fewer than when I left school, let alone when my mother did.

[Harrowby Hall]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315

Sriram says that this doesn't exist.

I doubt whether Sri can know the exact situation of all 1.3-odd billion Indians.

I think that Sriram should read the linked item.

Sunil Yadav is a Dalit. He talks about his struggle as a Dalit.

His four degrees include a master's from the prestigious Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and he is now pursuing an MPhil - an advanced postgraduate degree.

However, according to his official identity card, Mr Yadav is still a sammarjak, which is an Indian word for a manual scavenger. A manual scavenger is someone who cleans human and animal waste from buckets or pits, and is performed by members of low-caste communities - and mostly by Dalits, also known as Untouchables.

[Sriram]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315

Sriram says that this doesn't exist.

I doubt whether Sri can know the exact situation of all 1.3-odd billion Indians.

I think that Sriram should read the linked item.

Sunil Yadav is a Dalit. He talks about his struggle as a Dalit.

His four degrees include a master's from the prestigious Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and he is now pursuing an MPhil - an advanced postgraduate degree.

However, according to his official identity card, Mr Yadav is still a sammarjak, which is an Indian word for a manual scavenger. A manual scavenger is someone who cleans human and animal waste from buckets or pits, and is performed by members of low-caste communities - and mostly by Dalits, also known as Untouchables.

Ha! Ha! That's just the way BBC likes to publicize it.......and you enjoy talking about it!

I have already replied to Johnny and Udayana in the other thread on this subject. 

Dalits and other lower castes have been given free education and reserved quotas for Govt. jobs for decades. Even seats in premier institutes such as IIT ans IIM are reserved for dalits and other lower castes. 

http://persmin.gov.in/DOPT/RTICorner/ProactiveDisclosure/FAQ_SCST.pdf

But I don't think you really want to know! 

[Outrider]

Street cleaner with 4 degres (India of-course):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-33859315

Sriram says that this doesn't exist.

I doubt whether Sri can know the exact situation of all 1.3-odd billion Indians.

I think that Sriram should read the linked item.

Sunil Yadav is a Dalit. He talks about his struggle as a Dalit.

His four degrees include a master's from the prestigious Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and he is now pursuing an MPhil - an advanced postgraduate degree.

However, according to his official identity card, Mr Yadav is still a sammarjak, which is an Indian word for a manual scavenger. A manual scavenger is someone who cleans human and animal waste from buckets or pits, and is performed by members of low-caste communities - and mostly by Dalits, also known as Untouchables.

Ha! Ha! That's just the way BBC likes to publicize it.......and you enjoy talking about it!

I have already replied to Johnny and Udayana in the other thread on this subject. 

Dalits and other lower castes have been given free education and reserved quotas for Govt. jobs for decades. Even seats in premier institutes such as IIT ans IIM are reserved for dalits and other lower castes. 

http://persmin.gov.in/DOPT/RTICorner/ProactiveDisclosure/FAQ_SCST.pdf

But I don't think you really want to know! 

And that proves what?

Obama is black, but racism is still widespread in the US. Many European nations have representation quotas for women in government and corporate boardrooms, but there is still a noticable gender gap and demonstrable differences in part-time and full-time employments rates by gender.

A few - possibly admirable - policies do not on their own change the culturally embodied structural discriminations that are written through social structures.

O.

[Hope]

Dalits and other lower castes have been given free education and reserved quotas for Govt. jobs for decades. Even seats in premier institutes such as IIT ans IIM are reserved for dalits and other lower castes. 

http://persmin.gov.in/DOPT/RTICorner/ProactiveDisclosure/FAQ_SCST.pdf

But I don't think you really want to know! 

But Sri, being given free education and having reserved quotas doesn't mean that 'Dalits and other lower castes' are actually treated equally.  The very fact that they have to have 'reserved quotas' should be a clue to that.  Having lived and worked in the subcontinent for 10 years, I am also aware that such people find it very difficult to get accommodation near the locations of many of the 'reserved' Govt. jobs.