Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What is your question here Declan?


My view is simple - university is about studying something you enjoy, meeting people from different walks of life with different views who you wouldn't normally meet within your immediate circle and generally growing up and maturing, learning about the value of money, without your parents or formative peers making or framing your decisions.


I find it sad that it is commonly accepted today that you should study something so that you can get a job at the end of it. Take the opportunity to study what you want and then go on to train to do whatever you decide.

I went to university very late in life (40) did my degree and post grad diploma and got a job within a couple of months.

I knew the profession I wanted to be in, took the relevant qualifications, got the job and 15 years later still employed.

I think if you have a clear idea of your goal and that it is realistic i.e. teaching, occupational therapist, you are more likely to work hard and turn up for lectures etc. Eldest child went to uni to study psychology - no idea of a career post degree, various employments, now gone back to study of a 2nd degree in occupational therapy. Youngest child went for a B.Ed now working as a tutor in college.


I work with many young people who are on their gap year - very few of them have an idea of what they will do with their degree. One was doing Media Studies - she had no idea of a career,just thought a degree would give her an advantage with employers. Whilst this may be true a few years ago- rarely happens now.

Would just like to add to my previous post that living away from home and being exposed to a wide variety of people from all cultures and regions, having to manage on very little money etc, is an education in itself. The 2 that went to uni are far more confident in their outlook, can converse easily, can adjust more readily to living on a reduced income and have a wider range of interest. Our other daughter left school at 16, dropped out of FE college as found it boring,although being more street wise than the other 2, finds it more difficult to mix with others outside her own circle of friends. She is now a mother of 3 (8 - 15 years)but still lacks confidence in her abilities.

I still think it depends on the University you attend, I am not a great fan of dumbing down in order to increase the numbers of graduates.


My first two years were very much a social event, my final year became very intense as a result.


I was sponsored through by the Govt and had my career path mapped out.


So to me it was the vehicle I needed.


My eldest daughter's first term at University College, London starts tomorrow....


I guess I will know shortly how that works out.

I would have thought it depended on the course chosen. Pugwash's comments were pertinent. It worries me that many youngsters think a degree in , for example Media Studies , will have a career in television or radio, where perhaps degrees in English, History or other traditional subjects would open more doors.


My daughter hopes to study modern languages and I would encourage her even if her eventual career might not necessarily need a second language.


Good luck to your daughter Santerne.

I went to uni to get drunk, I did very well.


So, I probably shouldn't have gone to uni, at least not at 18, when I was just using it as a half way house between living at home, and being a proper adult.


Uni should be for people who really want to study. The problem is, unis need bums on seats, so are throwing places at people who really don't belong there.

Perfect Keef,


This, I suppose, could be true. I don't know about every course at every uni. Certainly some courses (law, engineering, medicine, architecture) are as over-subscribed as ever this year. I think there are less students taking a gap year and I hear that there is more pressure/competition than ever. No dumbing down required.

I think a lot of this depends where you come from.30 years ago as child of working class parents I went to Polytechnic to train for a job, as did partner - an engineer.Our parents would not have supported us to do a degree in History or English - as we needed to "get a job at the end". We were not encouraged to be educated for the sake of it, but to get a job. Now from the luxury of having made it to being fully middle class I would say yes do a History degree if you want, whilst partner would say absolutely no to a physics or chemistry degree- as "there will be no job at the end". Some degrees like English might teach you skills for life- but partner thinks a Physics/ Chemistry degree is hopeless.


I like this concept very much silverfox along with those saying that University life was a part of helping one to grow up. My son is keen to go next year and has already got a place for the course he wanted to do. He needs to grow up as much as anything else and being away from home will be an education in itself. If he ends up with a degree, great. If he ends up just being more mature, that's good too.


What I found strange is that Uni's would lower their standards by offering extra marks for kids who showed up for lectures. That I can't get. As ???? said it should be considered a privelige to have the chance to go and maybe with that attitude more would be achieved.

My parents were deperate for me to go to Uni. A LOT of pressure. Schools in Ireland used to do day-trips to the various Unis and colleges so we could get some idea of what we fancied


I wasn't the lease bit interested. Finally, on the last possible visit to NIHE Limerick I was captivated by the sociology, languages and humanities courses. I couldn't wait to tell the folks...


Turns out they wanted me to do a PROPER degree - engineering or summat. What kind of job would I get with "humanities" they wanted to know


So I never went. Left school (and home) at 16. Kind of wish I had gone to Uni for the atmos but mostly glad I made my own way.


The question from the OP can be interpreted in many ways - from my time hanging around friends halls and speaking to those who went - yeah it definitely is "all it's cracked up to be"


Is it necessary for most? Probably not

I am the only one in all of my family -siblings, parents, grandparents, cousins and aunties and uncles, the whole bleedin' lot, who has ever been so am still considered the 'Swotty Git' ( I 'think' they were all proud of me)...so of course I was immensley proud of myself, worked extremely hard, and didn't try and waste the taxpayers money (those were the days) on drink and drugs, oh no

Declan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What I found strange is that Uni's would lower

> their standards by offering extra marks for kids

> who showed up for lectures. That I can't get. As

> ???? said it should be considered a privelige to

> have the chance to go and maybe with that attitude

> more would be achieved.


If I look back on my (extraordinarily privileged) 18-year-old self, and my friends of that era, I think I can confidently

say that my experience of very young adults at university is that they do not at all appreciate how privileged they are. Many people look back on their university days and wish they had had more focus.... while not necessarily regretting having a lot of fun.

Higher education has some parallels with tourism: if it becomes a mass thing, everyone goes, then that alters the goalposts for everyone.


When everyone goes to the beach etc., it's just not the same (crowded, noisy, crowded skies, flight delays...), and when everyone goes to university, the experience is devalued (no/fewer/lower grants, class overcrowding, teaching by postgrad students, and little or no income differential when you come out as everyone else has a degree too).

womanofdulwich Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> but partner thinks a Physics/Chemistry degree is hopeless.


That is simply untrue!


For professions requiring a high level of numeracy (accounting, finance, computing, etc) a good science degree will often be a pre-requisite for graduate programs. And if you're smart enough to get a Physics PhD, you could be heading for a very lucrative career in analytics in the city.

louisiana Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Higher education has some parallels with tourism:

> if it becomes a mass thing, everyone goes, then

> that alters the goalposts for everyone.

>

> When everyone goes to the beach etc., it's just

> not the same (crowded, noisy, crowded skies,

> flight delays...), and when everyone goes to

> university, the experience is devalued

> (no/fewer/lower grants, class overcrowding,

> teaching by postgrad students, and little or no

> income differential when you come out as everyone

> else has a degree too).



I agree, we are definitely dumbing down.


My daughter chose her course to give best experience as well as academic qualification, it is a four year course with the third year studying at Milan University, she has good Italian and hopefully she will gain total fluency as the bonus!

Jeremy said:


"For professions requiring a high level of numeracy (accounting, finance, computing, etc) a good science degree will often be a pre-requisite for graduate programs. And if you're smart enough to get a Physics PhD, you could be heading for a very lucrative career in analytics in the city."


Not quite as often as you think Jeremy dear. A large number of people with physics PhDs are lucky if they secure temporary contracts as university researchers.

Definatley all its cracked up to be - or it was in 1986-1989. I loved it, worked hard for my A levels to get in there (with some parental pressure) but did bugger all for 2 and half years while I was there. Worked for the last few months to save my future.


However I had a great time, made many friends and found my financial and social independence - I think its a great stepping stone before work - its soon enough to start working.


Its a privelege not a right, but also think that those smart enough to get in should get in, I don't see why those who have not excelled in 14 years of education should be forced or encouraged to have 3/4 years more.


As for attendance, then I guess there should be a low minimum attendance requirement but this should not be stringent or be rewarded with marks. This is counter productive.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I agree,  but if this was to be the main entrance/exit the road outside would need to be much safer,  with new crossings and widened pavements etc.
    • Robin's tree ideas in Village ward described by here inspired us East Dulwich Councillors to have the cherry trees planted on the northern section of Melbourne Grove and elsewhere in what was then called East dulwich ward and now largely Goose green ward. 
    • Anyone know what’s happened on the Lordship Lane Estate? Lots of police, ambulances, areas cornered off, police tape everywhere. Lordship Lane side of the Estate near Melford Road.
    • This is my take of the scheme and planning committee report: Railway Yard Scheme 402 objectors and 22 supporters. Huge local concern about this proposal. The scheme is out of character and contrary to The Southwark Plan and Suburban zoning for the site. The adjacent schemes 18-22 Grove Vale is ground and three stories, The Charter School North Dulwich is 3-4, the Tessa Jowel Health Centre is ground and two stories.  This proposed scheme is significantly higher and bulkier. And the corrugated iron looking top floors will be visible for some distance from the site. All the views in the report demonstrate how out of keeping with the Suburban zone this scheme in. What is the point of having such policies if they are ignored? Council officers and members have agreed the site must be redeveloped with an indicative capacity of 53 new homes. The proposal is 3 to 4 times bigger than that with 53 homes and 360 student rooms and additional shared spaces. (2.5 student rooms equating to 1 home). The officer report incorrectly talks about buses going to Brixton, which makes me concerned about the PTAL calculation which partly I would imagine officers have based their acceptance of this over development.  PTAL 4 for the site. TfL PTAL calculator. The social housing will likely be 3.  The assumptions are crow flies. If it is time to access public transport then much of the remainder of the site becomes PTAL3 and the rationale for the officers recommends would be incorrect.  Student accommodation demand comments appear to date from three years ago. Since then various research showing significantly reduced numbers which have not been included in the report. BBC 5 March states 14% drop in foreign students. The House of Commons library 25 March states most foreign students are now postgrads therefore questionable if this accommodation would meet their needs.  ONS reporting that the number of children who will become students has been consistently falling. That Southwark itself is in the process of closing up to 17 primary schools! This will feed through to reduced undergraduate numbers.  The report suggests circa £10,000 is spent by each student in the area. I would suggest vast majority is on accommodation and not circulating in local shops and facilities or indeed Southwark more widely. Additionally they receive free public transport so will not be contributing towards any required improvements.  The report then suggests each student residing at this scheme would be spending around £5,400 in the immediate East Dulwich area each year. This seems extremely unlikely.  The report states members should give some consideration for daylight and sunlight loss with 21 minor, 8 moderate, and 20 substantial adverse reductions. A good scheme would have avoided this.  Any normal school in the Subriban South Zone would have avoided this. Overlooking. Officers state this as minimal. That the reduction in living conditions is acceptable.  That is so easy to type in a report. Many objectors have stated the reduction is not accepted by local residents. Objectively the average person has reached a different conclusion.  Members have the unenviable task of telling ordinary people they are wrong if you approve this scheme.  I would suggest the residents who would suffer this as disagreeing! The blocks will loom over houses nearby. Down to 8.2m gaps on place! If the scheme were to be approved then corridors overlooking 18-22 Grove Vale, Railway Rise scheme proprerties as a minimum should be opaque or angled away. No one wants lots gawping students! I was amazed to see under fire safety a stay put policy would apply. Really? Could a Southwark Planning Committee post Lakanal and GRenfell approve a scheme that relies on that - especially when many students could have English as a second language.  The trip generation stats. From the 53 homes and 360 students stated they would generate 0.76/78 trips per am and pm bus. The am buses are already rammed. And extra 2.4/2.5  people on each peak train.  That would be 33 students and residents across 42 buses serving the 40/176/185 bus routes 7-9am each day. The P13 & 42 would be incredibly inconvenient so can be discounted. Plus only 9 trains 7-9am  going into london so that would be 22 residents and students. So each working day officers have agreed with the developer only 55 people of the 360 students and 53 social homes would be on public transport in the peak times.  This appears quite the fiction. The 53 homes alone are likely to have more than 53 people in employment!  The report talks about limiting student moving in and out times. But the surrounding streets Comtrolled Parking Zone doesn’t cover weekends. Each weekend day we can anticipate an extra 50-100 vehicles needing to park before and after dropping students at this proposed development. This issue has not been covered and is unsolvable to the satisfaction of local residents.  The report even talks about the local tube station which we don’t have! It would be hard to spread this into weekdays as that would risk clashing with the adjacent school start and finish times placing pupils at risk.  This also requires the disabled parking spaces to be relinquished for several weekends each year. How does that work. Part time disabled? Real risk the controlled parking in the area would need to become 24/7 as a number of residents may have cars and they try and park outside the current CPZ operating times.  402 objectors and 22 supporters. This peaks volumes. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...