Politics UK
http://www.economist.com/:
"As the prospect of a recovery slips over the horizon, there is a widespread perception that Britain’s young are suffering most of all—hit as teenagers by the removal of some means-tested benefits, as students by soaring university tuition fees, as young adults by a lack of affordable homes and at every turn by a lack of jobs.
Amid headlines about a “lost generation”, voter support for deficit reduction may be tested, suggests the minister. “People will make sacrifices for their kids and grandkids,” he says. If the young look like sacrificial victims, that is “socially corrosive”."
Are British youths the "sacrificial victims" of the coalition Government's budget cuts?
And if that is true, what prospects do the “lost generation” have?
S.C.
The new generation is certainly suffering a lot at the moment, not easy for them. We cannot expect new generations to have better standards of living than their parents anymore... (already my generation seems to have a lower standard of living than the baby boomer's)
C.S.
They have exactly the prospects that they wish to make for themselves!I myself being 23 am apart of this 'lost generation' and I know where I am now and where i'm heading.Anybody can do anything if they want it bad enough.lets not forget we have it easy here.even in these 'hard times'
J.Z.H.
I am too. My dad's generation had to do things for themselves, and had it a lot harder than we did. I reckon most our age take comfort and ease for granted. I'm well aware of the path I'm taking and it's by no means easy, but it will be worth it in the long run.
S.C.
Good for you guys, you have the right attitude though on a macro-analysis level we cannot deny that the new generation does not have some of the opportunities the oldest had? (such as free Uni for instance)
J.Z.H.
No, but then people weren't being crammed into universities the way they are now, often with poor qualifications, and bad attitues and work ethics, which has led to a higher drop out rate, and more interest in courses which have no bearing on employability - and laziness wasn't so common as people HAD to get things done. Sometimes I don't think people realise how good we rally have it. A great number of uni entrants would be better suited to apprenticeships.
A.P.
So why do governments spend so much time encouraging kids to go to Uni,they come up with figures about how many kids they want in university(At least labour did),its not the be all and end all,lots of kids would be better off doing vocational courses and learning a trade
M.C.
No comments from the left footers then ??????????
Wonder if Robin has read this yet ??
ps: J.Z.H., C.S., good on you both
J.Z.H.
Thanks M.C.
J.Z.H.
We'd be a lot better off for it too A.P.!
W.MacD.
Once again the young are being attacked, "crammed into universities the way they are now, often with poor qualifications" I dont believe the qualification entry standards were reduced for University.
top ten degrees in 2006? anyone?
Law
Design Studies
Psychology
Management Studies
Business Studies
Computer Science
English
Medicine
Sports Science
Social Work
I think all of those would lead to an increase in your empolyability so please do stop generalising about todays youth being bad.
M.C. is that ok for you enough to show what utter rot you and J.Z.H. are talking?
M.C.
Notice the exclusion of any manual skills W.MacD., you know, the get your hands dirty ones
W.MacD.
so the jobs market is exclusively one where you have to get your hands dirty?
W.MacD.
so that means J.Z.H. who is in medicine isnt in a 'real' job?
M.C.
It was J.Z.H.s & C.S.'s ethic that deserved praise
W.MacD.
thats not what we were discussing
M.C.
I wasnt discussing anything, simply commenting
W.MacD.
I highlighted via my post the top ten degrees after J.Z.H. claimed that the youth today participate in degrees that wont lead to jobs, on seeing that list you pointed out that there was a lack of manual skills, as I asked is the job market one exclusicely built on jobs where you get your hands dirty
W.MacD.
No comments from the left footers then ??????????
thats not a comment thats a question
M.C.
True :lol
W.MacD.
and you also responded to my post
M.C.
Because I like you
W.MacD.
I know you cant help yourself
W.MacD.
:p
S.C.
You 2 are so funny
J.Z.H.
Sorry but most of these do not, and they certainly do not lead to increase in earning power as has been claimed. It might not be obvious, but we are not over run with psychologists and English teachers, nor is sports science a particularly sought degree among employers. A great number of degrees do not actually qualify you for a job, nor do they lead to jobs, they simply represent an academic understanding of a subject. Sciences, medicine, engineering and law make degree requirements, as there is a minimum or legal skill set required for practice.
Business and management studies are mostly unnecessary, as people tend to take these (at least everyone I have met doing so), because they simply want a degree or find it interesting, and do not have much idea of what to do afterwards. But again it does not 'qualify' someone for a job, nor does it lead to any specific line of work. Many graduates of these subjects work in field far removed from their academic study fields.
Also I think a more up to date list would be necessary here, as I can say from experience that the arts and other degrees have massive interest where science and engineering have relatively little. Law appears to be holding up rather well. I'm not sure what the figures are for courses in 2010-11 but there is a huge demand for what are seen as 'softer options'.
More incentives for people to go into trades and skilled manual work would be a very good idea. At least then folks would stop complaining about the numbers of foreign workers needed to do jobs, and would have a positive effect on unemployment, and employability. Generally I think engineering should be given more priority both in university courses and apprenticeships.
And yes the job market is primarily propped up by manual work and industry, as the money has to come from somewhere. Sadly this country seems to have lost it's way there...
W.MacD.
'Sorry but most of these do not, and they certainly do not lead to increase in earning power'
The phrase you used was 'bearing on employability' and if your honestly going to try and claim that having a degree in law a degree in psychology a degree in social work or medicine etc.... doesnt have a bearing on your employability then your living in cloud cukoo land.
Evrything else you said after that first sentence is you trying to justify changing what you said because what you originally said has been proven to be so wide of the mark as to be comical.
J.Z.H.
Sorry but I haven't changed my position at all. And I didn't claim having a degree in law or medicine doesn't affect employability. But I am claiming that popularity of degrees in psychology and social work has no bearing on employability. These figures you have given are not for graduates of various disciplines. They are simply the number of people applying for degrees. And the vast majority do not lead to a job, or give any guarantee of employability within a field. As I said most people are not studying degrees which will have a bearing on employability.
S.C.
Anyway university was never meant to be purely utilitarian as in increase our employability level. It is meant to provide an education in the true sense, teach you how to think, how to be a citizen and , yes, know your classics... only the wealthy can now see it this way, as it used to be in the past...
S.C.
Terrible state of affairs
W.MacD.
'It might not be obvious, but we are not over run with psychologists and English teachers' - isnt that kinda the point of training more of them!?... duh
nor is sports science a particularly sought degree among employers - except for employers who seek employees with sports degrees.
Demand is growing for sports scientists and performance consultants, as society in general develops a greater awareness of health and fitness issues around work. What's more, with the 2012 Olympics around the corner, your skills are likely to be further sought after by local authorities and other organisations.
Famous sports science graduates include Peter Phillips, son of the Princess Royal, who studied at Exeter, and Paralympic sprinter John McFall.
Of 2009 graduates, over 60% went straight into full-time or part-time employment, with around a third in sports-related industries. Careers in education (11.1%), the public sector (7.6%), health (2.8%) and business (2.7%) were also popular choices. The relatively low proportion immediately employed in stop-gap retail or catering work implies there is a higher than average demand for sports science graduates.
Common career options include personal trainer, fitness instructor or leisure centre manager, but you could also be a PE teacher or lecturer, or a sports therapist helping to get injured athletes back on their feet.
"The sports industry offers a wide range of career options that sports science graduates could pursue," says Margaret Holbrough, a careers adviser at Graduate Prospects. "Those most closely related to the discipline are sports coaching, sports development, personal trainer or manager of a fitness or outdoor pursuits centre."
Other career paths include being a sports administrator involved in funding and organising activities, events organiser, sports psychologist or health promotion specialist. The knowledge gained on a sports science degree can also open doors to other sectors such as hospitality or youth work. As Holbrough adds: "Some graduates may have to undertake a portfolio of work to build their career by combining several roles, either on a paid or voluntary basis."
honestly J.Z.H. you should quit while your so far behind, and you really shouldnt make sweeping generalisations.
J.Z.H.
Full source here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/dec/11/sports-science-degree
I think you're think of this back to front, especially when you ask if that is the point in training more of them. The figures you give are from 2006, so one can reasonably assume that these graduates are now safely in the work place... so where is the rise in psychologists, improvements in local mental health services? Maybe more papers published? Possibly, given the extra skills on hand, setting up of new departments and an ability, even on a small scale, to provide more efficient services? How about the English graduates? One might assume that wth a larger talent pool to choose from we could be seeing a rise in literacy and education?
The reason this is back to front is because the demand is not as high as those choosing the study. We can use your example here of sports science graduates, specifically the information you have provided.
60% of those graduates went into jobs, both full and part-time, although the jobs given as examples do not require a sports science degree, nor do they tell us how many went into full or part time employment (perhaps the source is generalising too?).
Now are these people employed by a company as trainers, or (more likely as that is the nature of the industry) advertising themselves as personal trainers and working from a public gym? Remember this is not an industry which is highly regulated like others, and virtually anyone can become a personal trainer quickly. I know of an awful lot who have sports science degrees (which by the way does not make one an expert on training or coaching), and rely on that to advertise themslves as trainers. This is of course very part-time work, which they would have been able to do without a 3 year university degree, usually done because they find it simple and can't find relevent employment. This is a field marked by a very high level of self-employment.
Are these actual jobs or something they are simply doing because they cannot find employment? How long did thse jobs actually last? Alas, details are not given. Except of course that only a third worked in a sports related field. We will assume this is a third of the graduates, rather than a third of those going stright into employment for arguments sake, but this is not stated, nor any of the other percentages given.
But what of the others? 11.1% work in education, despite only 6% undergoing teacher training... where are they then teaching? Are these self-given job descriptions? Perhaps it is on a different basis from the curriculum. What about public sector work? Exactly which jobs, and how did a sports science degree help them secure these jobs? In fact does the fact that they have a sports science degree necessarily make any contribution to their career choice or employability? Again, we are not told this. How many of these were employed on the basis of their degree rather than personal attributes or relevent experience, something which employers are looking at more closely now, given the large numbers of graduates, and attitudes of those looking for work?
Who are they working for? Hospitality and youth work? Is a sports science degree really call for by employers for this?
We then have smaller percentages working within health or business. Does a sports science degree qualify you for these jobs?
However many of these jobs in other fields are actually related to sports science? What for that matter of the other 40% of graduates who did not go into employment directly? Dod they eventually find employment? One hopes so of course, being out of work isn't all it's cracked up to be.
In fact the source quotes that sports science graduates must be in demands because only a small percentage went into retail, etc, after graduating (actually if we allow for percentages of the whole, and assume that those studying post-graduate were not working, this still amounts to just over 10%). Of course this does not mean anything of the sort. After all, 2/3 of these graduates did not work within the field of their degree (again I'll assume for the sake of your argument that is a percentage of the whole, rather than of the 60% who went into employment).
Only a small percentage (6%) went onto post-graduate study, so only a few would actually go on to be specialists of any kind in their field, or seriously wanted to use their degree professionally, some of which are rather removed, such as nutrition, although let's simply assume that it involves sports nutrition.
We also have a quote (journalists love quotes): "Some graduates may have to undertake a portfolio of work to build their career by combining several roles, either on a paid or voluntary basis."
Which adds another question to our list: How many of those employed are in paid or unpaid employment? Again, not given.
So no, I'm afraid I will have to disagree that sports science degrees are that valuable, except to the minority, who choose to progress afterwards. Certainly there does not seem to be any reliable evidence that the sports science degree has actually improved employability, simply a correlation between people having a degree and having a job of some sort afterwards, and nothing to show that mployers actually took into account the degree. In fact if we assume only helf of that extra 40% were unemployed, and take sports science graduates as a sample population, that would still be double the percentage in national population.
Please remember that when quoting newspaper articles, especially those involving statistics, that statistics never prove cause and effect. The trend certainly doesn't show that these degrees are in demand, nor that they hold any special relevence to employability. It certainly doesn't show us anything regarding long-term emplyability of job stability of course, whether these percentages were taken from a sample population or nationally, especially given the relatively unregulated job fields of a good proportion. Nice advertisement for sports science graduates and students though.
What to do with a degree in sports science
www.guardian.co.uk
It might not make you a world-class sprinter like Usain Bolt, but a sports science degree could open many different doors
W.MacD.
"I think you're think of this back to front, especially when you ask if that is the point in training more of them".- why else would you train people if not to fill a job?
"the figures you give are from 2006, so one can reasonably assume that these graduates are now safely in the work place" - agreed except the 2009 stats show 60% went into a job on completion of their degree so its a safe assumption.
"so where is the rise in psychologists, improvements in local mental health services? Maybe more papers published? Possibly, given the extra skills on hand, setting up of new departments and an ability, even on a small scale, to provide more efficient services? How about the English graduates? One might assume that wth a larger talent pool to choose from we could be seeing a rise in literacy and education?" - bears no relevance to the topic at hand dont know why you felt the need to post that.
The reason this is back to front is because the demand is not as high as those choosing the study. We can use your example here of sports science graduates, specifically the information you have provided.
"60% of those graduates went into jobs, both full and part-time, although the jobs given as examples do not require a sports science degree, nor do they tell us how many went into full or part time employment (perhaps the source is generalising too?)." - neither did we differntiate about part time or full time in the original post , and yes it does tell us that 1/3rd of those jobs were sports related.
"Now are these people employed by a company as trainers, or (more likely as that is the nature of the industry) advertising themselves as personal trainers and working from a public gym? Remember this is not an industry which is highly regulated like others, and virtually anyone can become a personal trainer quickly. I know of an awful lot who have sports science degrees (which by the way does not make one an expert on training or coaching), and rely on that to advertise themslves as trainers. This is of course very part-time work, which they would have been able to do without a 3 year university degree, usually done because they find it simple and can't find relevent employment. This is a field marked by a very high level of self-employment. " - mere conjecture with no relevance to the post save distraction from the original debate.
"Are these actual jobs or something they are simply doing because they cannot find employment? How long did thse jobs actually last? Alas, details are not given. Except of course that only a third worked in a sports related field. We will assume this is a third of the graduates, rather than a third of those going stright into employment for arguments sake, but this is not stated, nor any of the other percentages given." - 60% went straight into JOBS! big clue there. again time scale isnt relevant yes 1/3rd did somethign you didnt seem clear on earlier in your post. the graduates are the ones going straight into employment.
THis is like pulling teeth all this nitpicking for absolutely no reason, i've given the evidence to prove your generalisation was incorrect, if you cannot undestand that information J.Z.H. I'm sorry but thats not my fault.
K.M.J.
I do feel that having so much emphasis on academic qualifications and not general ability is one of the main reasons that our youth today have been placed in the situation of not having hope of progression. Qualifications should not be the be all and end all of employability. Hard work dedication and ability count for nothing in some peoples eyes.
W.MacD.
the thing is when you have an economy primarily based on the service sector than manufacturing there is going to be less need for manual labourers.
Qualifications are a huge indicator of skill and hardwork, and professionalism so its understandable that employers want more highly qualified employees.
This is one of the major differences between the public and the private sector on the whole on average employees in thepublic tend to be better andmore highly trained, in part because their employer sees the worth in training.
K.M.J.
W.MacD. .. I am not saying that getting a qualification at an early age is beneficial in todays employment environment. I am just saying that I would never have got further than a checkout at Tesco in my career if I had needed a qualification to say I can do what I used to do.
I went to night school in my thirties to get the qualifications for work I was already being paid to do.
W.MacD.
I'm also not claiming that either K.M.J., but having qualifications like I said and more specifically a degree does increase your employability in spite of whats been claimed on here.
A.K.
Many jobless young people have no hope for the future. This government has tunnel vision with their eyes firmly fixed on cutting the deficit in the shortest time...to hell with the consequences. The government hell bent on creating a "vast army of unemployed" to supply cheap/free labour big businesses who bankrolle the Tory government.
High and rising unemployment figures prove that the governments policies are not working and that the system needs investment not cuts.
The GCSE pass rate has soared with 70% of pupils getting at least a C these young people have worked hard and deserve praise and reward for this hard work not being thrown on the scrap- heap...
J.Z.H.
W.MacD. in case you didn't notice in my previous posts, these people are not being trained for jobs! They are simply studying for an academic qualification and as can be seen from a breakdown of your source, there is no cause and effect between sports science degrees and employability.
J.Z.H.
A.K., the only problem with young people being rewarded for their work, is that employers are increasingly finding them unemployable. Schools are now far more concerned with targets and pass rates to teach basic principles and behaviours expected in the workplace, such as attitudes and appearance, manners and reliability, things that are increasingly overlooked in schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment