Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2
Discussion
JawKnee said:
Crafty_ said:
But you are quite correct, a degree in something like engineering doesn't mean you are more intelligent/capable than an engineer who went and did an apprenticeship for example.
Rubbish. Unless you do a serious amount of self study while on an apprenticeship, you don't get the extensive background knowledge or analytical skills drilled into you if you don't study at University. In my engineering discipline at least, you can spot from a mile off those who haven't properly studied the subject. A degree is a requirement in almost every job advert I see, no matter how many years experience you have. 
I'm fortunate that I work in an industry (IT) where a degree is secondary compared to solid experience and a proven track record. As a contractor that experience is even more important.
Edited by 98elise on Monday 3rd October 08:29
98elise said:
I'm fortunate that I work in an industry (IT) where a degree is secondary compared to solid experience and a proven track record. As a contractor that experience is even more important.
that's because you work in a sub-standard industry where people are too stupid to see the FACT that degrees are all important - preferably 3 of them 
98elise said:
My father is a CEng in both Electrical and Mechanical engineering. He doesn't have a degree yet his skills seem to be in constant demand even though he hasn't "properly studied" his subjects
We come across people like that regularly in my industry and I can assure you they aren't a patch on the qualified version. They tend to be the 'waifs and strays' as we call them. There's always 'a bit missing' when it comes to dealing with things etcMy son and I went to the open day at Manchester University at the weekend.
They showed us typical timetables for study.
The Humanities subjects had nine hours of study a week - lectures, tutorials and the like.
The sciences, with lab sessions, had twenty hours of "contact study" a week.
Simon
They showed us typical timetables for study.
The Humanities subjects had nine hours of study a week - lectures, tutorials and the like.
The sciences, with lab sessions, had twenty hours of "contact study" a week.
Simon
simonrockman said:
My son and I went to the open day at Manchester University at the weekend.
They showed us typical timetables for study.
The Humanities subjects had nine hours of study a week - lectures, tutorials and the like.
The sciences, with lab sessions, had twenty hours of "contact study" a week.
Simon
We had 34 hours a week. Not even time off Wednesday afternoon for sports. My mate did archaeology and it was 4 hours - he didn't attend for a while at all and it took half a term for them to notice. I thought it would change with the charging and students demanding to be properly educated! They showed us typical timetables for study.
The Humanities subjects had nine hours of study a week - lectures, tutorials and the like.
The sciences, with lab sessions, had twenty hours of "contact study" a week.
Simon
simonrockman said:
My son and I went to the open day at Manchester University at the weekend.
They showed us typical timetables for study.
The Humanities subjects had nine hours of study a week - lectures, tutorials and the like.
The sciences, with lab sessions, had twenty hours of "contact study" a week.
Simon
Surely that is because the point of a humanities degree is that you arent spoon fed (for lack of a better phraese) 'right' and 'wrong' answers. In Maths 2+2 will always be 4. In history the statement 'The RAF won the battle of Britain' is not a fact, it is an opinion that must be backed up with facts. Facts you learn about in the 20-30 hours reading you are supposed to do a week outside of class time.They showed us typical timetables for study.
The Humanities subjects had nine hours of study a week - lectures, tutorials and the like.
The sciences, with lab sessions, had twenty hours of "contact study" a week.
Simon
Now, many students don't do those hours. And then complain they get poor results.
Horses for courses.
Simon (a different one)
pingu393 said:
Kermit power said:
pingu393 said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Incidentally plenty of army officers without degrees.
They either have a degree or have come up through the ranks and reached WO2 (that's five promotions) before becoming an officer.So, it's either a degree or lots of relevant experience. Which has she got?
Warrant Officers can be promoted (usually directly to Captain, I believe) without going through Sandhurst, but anyone of any rank can be sent to Sandhurst - one of the women my sister went through with was a serving corporal at the time - so long as they meet the minimum educational standards.
Said minimum educational standards are something like an equivalent minimum of 7 GCSEs at grade C or above and 2 A levels at grade E or above. A degree is not required.
t at school!OK, I wouldn't want her as Secretary of State for Education, but possibly a post of Junior Minister for s
t Kids or something might actually be worthwhile?The current system pisses enormous amounts of cash up the wall, year in, year out, just trying to get some sort of education into the s
t kids, but never seem to have any success. Maybe if someone who was a st kid themselves tried directing the programme, rather than it always being given to middle class people who did well at their middle class schools, it might actually make a difference?I also think, slightly more seriously, that maybe having an ex-con as Minister for Prisons might actually be a good idea.
The current prison system has been created by nice, middle class people like me to whom the whole thing seems horrific, and therefore acts as a powerful deterrent. The problem, of course, is that by and large, it's not nice, middle class people who need deterring.
The only people I've met who have been sent to prison tell you a bit about their childhood and their life in general, and laugh at the notion of a prison service being any sort of deterrent. Get one of them setting the deterrents and planning the sort of training that might actually be useful in the outside world, and I suspect the recidivism rate would drop.
JawKnee said:
Rubbish. Unless you do a serious amount of self study while on an apprenticeship, you don't get the extensive background knowledge or analytical skills drilled into you if you don't study at University. In my engineering discipline at least, you can spot from a mile off those who haven't properly studied the subject. A degree is a requirement in almost every job advert I see, no matter how many years experience you have.
Returning to the reason this off-topic strand started, do you think that Corbyn appointing Angela Rayner as shadow education secretary is a good or bad thing?JawKnee said:
Rubbish. Unless you do a serious amount of self study while on an apprenticeship, you don't get the extensive background knowledge or analytical skills drilled into you if you don't study at University. In my engineering discipline at least, you can spot from a mile off those who haven't properly studied the subject. A degree is a requirement in almost every job advert I see, no matter how many years experience you have.
Didn't spot that, but pretty much what I then said. They just aren't the same calibre at all.JawKnee said:
Rubbish. Unless you do a serious amount of self study while on an apprenticeship, you don't get the extensive background knowledge or analytical skills drilled into you if you don't study at University. In my engineering discipline at least, you can spot from a mile off those who haven't properly studied the subject. A degree is a requirement in almost every job advert I see, no matter how many years experience you have.
The point is if a person has intelligence/aptitude they can learn whatever skills are relevant. A degree does not teach you that.snowen250 said:
Surely that is because the point of a humanities degree is that you arent spoon fed (for lack of a better phraese) 'right' and 'wrong' answers. In Maths 2+2 will always be 4. In history the statement 'The RAF won the battle of Britain' is not a fact, it is an opinion that must be backed up with facts. Facts you learn about in the 20-30 hours reading you are supposed to do a week outside of class time.
Now, many students don't do those hours. And then complain they get poor results.
Horses for courses.
Simon (a different one)
Indeed. 9 hours of tuition and lectures sounds about bang-on. That should provide a firm basis for the 30-40 hours reading/writing per essayNow, many students don't do those hours. And then complain they get poor results.
Horses for courses.
Simon (a different one)
V6Pushfit said:
JawKnee said:
Rubbish. Unless you do a serious amount of self study while on an apprenticeship, you don't get the extensive background knowledge or analytical skills drilled into you if you don't study at University. In my engineering discipline at least, you can spot from a mile off those who haven't properly studied the subject. A degree is a requirement in almost every job advert I see, no matter how many years experience you have.
Didn't spot that, but pretty much what I then said. They just aren't the same calibre at all.Common sense, the ability to prioritise tasks, thinking on their feet and such forth - poor in many, non existent with others, where as I find some of the apprentice trained lads with trade certificates are much better in those areas and far more able to troubleshoot.
Of course this all works both ways and every profession has its dingleberries, from the chap without a qualification to his name to those who are highly qualified - a chap in our department was just laid off, he holds a masters in a branch of mechanical engineering (I can't remember what it is precisely) and in twelve years I have never worked with anybody as stupid as him, the very idea of him operating his Vauxhall Zafira on the open road is terrifying.
JawKnee said:
Crafty_ said:
But you are quite correct, a degree in something like engineering doesn't mean you are more intelligent/capable than an engineer who went and did an apprenticeship for example.
Rubbish. Unless you do a serious amount of self study while on an apprenticeship, you don't get the extensive background knowledge or analytical skills drilled into you if you don't study at University. In my engineering discipline at least, you can spot from a mile off those who haven't properly studied the subject. A degree is a requirement in almost every job advert I see, no matter how many years experience you have. alock said:
Returning to the reason this off-topic strand started, do you think that Corbyn appointing Angela Rayner as shadow education secretary is a good or bad thing?
Many of the same friends I have on Facebook who love Corbyn, also used to despise Gove as Education Secretary because he'd never been a teacher... Crafty_ said:
But you are quite correct, a degree in something like engineering doesn't mean you are more intelligent/capable than an engineer who went and did an apprenticeship for example.
I think you're confusing a professional engineer and a mechanic, they're about as similar as a surgeon and a hairdresser. In general, engineers design things and mechanics fix things, you don't get to be a mechanical engineer via an apprenticeship but you can get to be a mechanic.RYH64E said:
Crafty_ said:
But you are quite correct, a degree in something like engineering doesn't mean you are more intelligent/capable than an engineer who went and did an apprenticeship for example.
I think you're confusing a professional engineer and a mechanic, they're about as similar as a surgeon and a hairdresser. In general, engineers design things and mechanics fix things, you don't get to be a mechanical engineer via an apprenticeship but you can get to be a mechanic.The Engineering Council do NOT require a degree for you to become chartered.
Next time I see him I'll ask him where his spanners are
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff