Are Universities now just woke nurseries.

[Camelot1971]

Liokault said:

Derek Smith said:

Castrol for a knave said:

A case of "if your not a socialist at 25 you have no heart, if you are still a socialist at 40, you have no head". Attributed to everyone form Clemenceau to Burke, but sums up Uni life for some people.

I used to man the climbing club stand for 3 years at Freshers - I noted the powers that be put the OTC next to the Socialist Workers (who were full fat Irish Nationalism at the time) every year. I suspect they were playing a merry game with young minds....

I expect most at uni are juggling money, work and getting laid. A small number shout angrily about stuff, but twas ever thus. Only now, we have a media that exists off creating out groups to a bunch of losers who thrive on it to feed their narrow prejudices and confirmation bias.

There was a sit-in at the LSE in the late 70s, a time when the police were asking for more money. I passed an occupied building, dressed in half blues, so not obviously a police officer to a blind person, on my way to Bow Street magistrates' court. One of the protestors called to me, and I walked over as I was early. We had a quick chat, and I said they should put a banner out in support of the police's fight for a living wage. I told him how much I got and the hours that I worked, and I thanked him and his friends for all the demonstrations that allowed me to top up my income through policing generally quiet demos.

By the end of the chat there was a small crowd, both sides of the window, and I was being told by passers by that I shouldn't 'encourage' them. I said they were entitled to demonstrate and, given they were highly educated, perhaps they should take a lead. They were going to be leaders in the future.

I shook hands with some of the demonstrators and walked off. When I walked back, after the case, there were three 'banners', table clothes, hanging outside, saying that the LSE students supported the police in their fight against the tyranny of the bosses. I applauded them, and they me. The banners got into an evening paper. I felt quite proud.

They were a pleasant crowd in the main, and had some pertinent points.

Not sure why, but whenever you post I start sympathising with defund the police.

If that happened, what would you replace the police with to uphold the law in the UK?

[Dagnir]

williamp said:

Yes, twas always thus...

But before the very recent, everyone woild just goll their eyes and carry on. Now, for some reason, they are listened and taken far more seriously then they should be..

It's been a running, ironic joke for a while now:

"It's just on Uni campuses, it'll never make it into the mainstream."

Almost every week there's some bonkers news story where this applies to 'real life'.

It was given too much legitimacy and western governments were too out of touch to react in time. Really sad but it's too late now. The cancer has taken hold and is spreading inexorably.

Ideas like individual liberty, individual responsibility and common sense are very soon to be things of the past.

[Oilchange]

Electro1980 said:

Kind of proves the point.
1) Disagreeing with taking the knee IS racist, etc...

Eh? Did I read that right?

[Pothole]

Liokault said:

Not sure why, but whenever you post I start sympathising with defund the police.

You should probably think about why, and if you actually understand what that phrase means.

[JeffreyD]

Pothole said:

Liokault said:

Not sure why, but whenever you post I start sympathising with defund the police.

You should probably think about why, and if you actually understand what that phrase means.

I think he was joking.

[williamp]

Maybe we should start a social media campaign to, you know.... cancel students??

[Supercilious Sid]

Pothole said:

You should probably think about why, and if you actually understand what that phrase means.

Ackchyually...

[HustleRussell]

The old decrying the young.
Nothing new under the sun.

[hungry_hog]

I think some people are under the impression universities are places where students go to learn 'facts / knowldge' which are useful in later life.
With the exception of a few courses e.g. Medicine, Dentistry and Vet Medicine I believe this is a massive oversimplification.

Many law students do not become lawyers
I studied chemistry (to PhD!), now work in Investment Banking (there are many of us PhDs, we have three Physicists in my team)
My sister studied classics, works in Finance
Mate studied Biology, works in HR
When I worked at Deloitte, the Excel wiz there had studied Anglo Saxon Norse and Celtic
Another mate fully qualified accountant, studied finance and works for an optician doing digital marketing
Oh and to boot one Medic (St Georges, top 10 in class) actually became a chartered accountant

(that is just a sample)

As far as I can see objectives of University are:

(a) get a nice brand on CV (Oxford, Cambridge, UCL etc.) which gives a bit of 'snob value'
(b) ideally study 'respected' subject, less important for Oxbridge
(c) get good social skills / become more rounded
(d) meet people for social purposes / future best mates / housemates / girlfriend / wife
(e) meet people for business connections / job connections
(f) get decent grade, but not at expense of (c) - (e), ideally 2.1+
(g) try new hobbies, sports teams etc. this links in with (c) (d) (e)

A person that can achieve a good portion of the above is onto a winner (not saying I have, I missed some of those for sure)

[mike9009]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-574...

Not all students are left wing.....

[techguyone]

mrporsche said:

brake fader said:

It seems since Blair said Education x 3 we have had a watered down system producing nothing but snowkflakes and activists .

His push to have 50% university educated, came with no logic, it just sounded good to him.

It did however increase the amount of people going and most tend to leave with a left leaning slant so would increase the number of future labour voters.

All I'm seeing is that degrees are increasingly becoming valueless because they're so common, many companies are demanding a degree to get an interview it's almost becoming standard.
Of course to get a degree you have to go to a University and pay a vast sum of money...

Far as I can tell, the only people gaining are the Universities themselves, with the huge fees they now command.

Ok it's not all entirely like that, my daughter got her BA & MA albeit in a useful subject rather than PPE or some media study, so it has panned out pretty well for her.

It does seem these days though that the moment Secondary school is over everyone rushes to a college then onto University rather than just getting a job as in older times.

[mike9009]

techguyone said:

It does seem these days though that the moment Secondary school is over everyone rushes to a college then onto University rather than just getting a job as in older times.

I agree, but with the job market for youngsters being so poor, if they can get into university it is probably a good idea to go.

[techguyone]

mike9009 said:

techguyone said:

It does seem these days though that the moment Secondary school is over everyone rushes to a college then onto University rather than just getting a job as in older times.

I agree, but with the job market for youngsters being so poor, if they can get into university it is probably a good idea to go.

true, but then you end up with the same number of people scratting around for jobs, just with a very expensive bill, then how do you differentiate the best candidate, the one with a 2.2, a 2.1, 1st? 1st with honours?

I'm a teeny bit sceptical, as said earlier, once something becomes common it loses its value, bit like if Gold was as common as gravel it would be worth nothing, same principle applies when half the country has a degree it becomes largely meaningless (and expensive)

[tangerine_sedge]

brake fader said:

It seems since Blair said Education x 3 we have had a watered down system producing nothing but snowkflakes and activists .

Ah! Another thread started by a returned bannee for no other reason than to start arguments and virtue signal their right wing credentials. Another day, the same old trolls.

[Polite M135 driver]

techguyone said:

All I'm seeing is that degrees are increasingly becoming valueless because they're so common, many companies are demanding a degree to get an interview it's almost becoming standard.
Of course to get a degree you have to go to a University and pay a vast sum of money...

Far as I can tell, the only people gaining are the Universities themselves, with the huge fees they now command.

Ok it's not all entirely like that, my daughter got her BA & MA albeit in a useful subject rather than PPE or some media study, so it has panned out pretty well for her.

It does seem these days though that the moment Secondary school is over everyone rushes to a college then onto University rather than just getting a job as in older times.

I think the value of a degree does depend substantially on the institution that awards it. There is no escaping this; prestigious institutions attract the best researchers (which keeps prestige high) and the best students, which keeps entry competitive, means we can have higher standards in our courses, and course, if your graduates are more capable then the reputation of your institution is maintained.

You are wrong that universities are gaining from this. Mostly, at the best universities since these fees were introduced, academic staff have higher workload and less time for research (you might, if you’re not that familiar with the sector, be shocked to know that I deliver just 12 lectures a year. I have probably about 60-70 hours of other teaching stuff each year, and everything else is research or (sadly) admin crap. Admittedly my position is at one extreme).

Your idea that universities are ‘raking it in’ and benefitting from this not quite correct. Actually, for very many courses the fees do not cover the costs (for example, a science subject will need labs that can fit 100-150 students a time, and all the instruments and equipment and consumables needed for them. These are expensive things to build, equip, run and maintain).

Universities in England now charge those about £9k fees. The idea (from the government) when these were introduced was that price differentiation would occur across the sector - i.e. Coventry would be cheaper than Cambridge… It wasn’t, because all universities, while having flexibility to set their fees, set them at the cap. This probably reflected two things: i) historically undergraduate degrees are underfunded (especially in sciences, medicine, dentistry - the fees do not cover the costs), so the sector took the opportunity to get closer to cost recovery; ii) lots of universities took the opportunity to try to expand/grow - the £9k fees came with the removal of student recruitment caps (previously universities were told how many students they could recruit for each subject).

Anyway, what I am seeing quite a lot of on this thread is anger about fees and disbelief that it is good value. What you need to remember is that it wasn’t universities who decided this is how the sector should be run. They are operating under the operating conditions that the government set.

You might, like many in the sector, think that the idea of ‘marketising’ education is stupid (how can you really play the dual roles of educator/assessor/award conferring institution AND service provider for your students once they become customers? Isn’t there inherent, and problematic, tension here between taking somebody’s money to educate them AND also being the organisation that makes the assessment of their education?).

Or you might think that universities should just be privately run institution, much like public schools. totally reasonable position, but if your problem is with the current level of fees, this might not be the solution you are looking for.

Or you might think that university education just isn’t good value for money: there, you are wrong. If you work hard and select a good course and university, you will get extreme value. From a reductionist perspective, your earnings will be much higher. From a saner point of view, your life will be magnificently enriched by the time you have to spend engaging intellectually with exciting ideas and exciting people whilst you are at university. Your perspective on the world will shift. You will make friendships that will last the rest of your life, and you really will build the core of your character and personal philosophy that will be with you the rest of your life too. Even if, for some people, that personal philosophy is drinking 8 pints every Friday and Saturday night,.

[FiF]

Polite M135 driver said:

or (sadly) admin crap.

Demeans the rest of the post frankly.

Every job has some administration elements. Even if it's just claiming justifiable expenses and goodness knows how difficult and time consuming that can be engineered by accounts. Again there are some admin tasks that seem pointless, probably originating from OfS or similar but that's another argument.

Too many academics seem to consider themselves above administration tasks, or in worst cases, even lowering themselves to deal with the staff employed to do those tasks but who need some input from much more highly paid academics. Sometimes the most minor of input is held up because someone considers themselves too important to answer a simple question. Yet that same individual is sometimes very disrespectful and quick to pass the buck when their original lack of engagement causes a bigger issue that comes to the attention of senior management and the ProVC office then questions why attention to a particular question has not been given.

I'm sure it doesn't apply to the poster in question, but universities, like any other multi million pound businesses do generate admin tasks the purposes of which are not directly seen to be core to an individual's activity. That's how it is, as consuming of time as it can be I always found it best to get it out of the way and then move on with a clear conscience and mind, plus no disruption from reminders or excessive spells spent catching up.

[BigMon]

Christ you can tell who the Daily Mail readers are on this thread can't you.

What an absolute load of bks.

Still, at least it's good for a chuckle and to read some responses from those who actually have a clue.

[Polite M135 driver]

FiF said:

Polite M135 driver said:

or (sadly) admin crap.

Demeans the rest of the post frankly.

Every job has some administration elements. Even if it's just claiming justifiable expenses and goodness knows how difficult and time consuming that can be engineered by accounts. Again there are some admin tasks that seem pointless, probably originating from OfS or similar but that's another argument.

Too many academics seem to consider themselves above administration tasks, or in worst cases, even lowering themselves to deal with the staff employed to do those tasks but who need some input from much more highly paid academics. Sometimes the most minor of input is held up because someone considers themselves too important to answer a simple question. Yet that same individual is sometimes very disrespectful and quick to pass the buck when their original lack of engagement causes a bigger issue that comes to the attention of senior management and the ProVC office then questions why attention to a particular question has not been given.

I'm sure it doesn't apply to the poster in question, but universities, like any other multi million pound businesses do generate admin tasks the purposes of which are not directly seen to be core to an individual's activity. That's how it is, as consuming of time as it can be I always found it best to get it out of the way and then move on with a clear conscience and mind, plus no disruption from reminders or excessive spells spent catching up.

FiF, I sort of take your point, some admin is necessary. My choice of words reflects my disdain for the tasks rather than the people involved in them, though.

I actually do consider academics not above, but rather worth insulating from as many admin tasks as can possibly be done, because it’s not the best use of their time. If you are hiring individuals in any organisation, you want them focused where they can best contribute. It is just not the best use of resource to use Prof BigBrain to collate marks on a spreadsheet, or do some obscure accounting related thing, or for example. She or he should be teaching or researching. Just like you don’t have pilots cleaning the plane after it lands, or whatever.

However, what I agree that absolutely doesn’t justify is Prof BigBrain behaving unprofessionally rudely or inconsiderately or uncollegially to people in non-academic specialist roles. And I think you are right there is a bit of tendency towards this intellectual/academic snobbishness. Prof BigBrain might be the world’s foremost expert in the lesser spotted brown toe-slug, but Prof BigBrain also needs to recognise that the professional staff around them are experts in their own areas and respect that, recognise their judgement, and respond to them when they need input for their job. Any mature/sane academic will recognise the work of their group just wouldn’t happen without a whole cohort of professional specialists to support it.

Responsiveness, though, is an interesting issue because constant availability (and constant PH posting) is quite corrupting to academic work, which really does need (as I think you know) uninterrupted focus and long stretches of time where you can just, almost aimlessly, ponder. I think in the future universities who get this right - can best structure their organisations to make those crucial but non-core tasks you mention as minimally interrupting as possible - will be the ones who best prosper. I think cultures of responsiveness (back and forth email exchanges, expectation that you reply in e.g. 24 hours) are corruptive for the hardest intellectual tasks.

Now it’s sounding like I think universities should extend their nursery role to the academics they, er, ‘look after’. I’ve always felt at home in ‘institutions’ anyway.

[TheFungle]

Emeye said:

Drumroll said:

Type R Tom said:

I don't know if this is true or just right wing propaganda but I do have concerns about things like white supremacy / privilege, critical race theory, patriarchy, some transgender issues etc being taught as fact instead of debated as an opinion.

Is that your opinion or is it a fact?

Unless you have actually been to all universities in the last few years.

From what my son and the children of my friends have experienced this is happening at secondary schools, so I suspect what we hear is happening at Universities is not just right-wing propaganda.

It's the usual I support free speech until I disagree with you and find it offensive, which we see all over social media - I doubt universities are free of it as it is coming into the work environment too.

That is disgraceful. We must unite and VOTE OUT the WOKE LEFT WING GOVERNMENT that has undemocratically rules us for the last 11 years.

[Countdown]

Polite M135 driver said:

I think the value of a degree does depend substantially on the institution that awards it. There is no escaping this; prestigious institutions attract the best researchers (which keeps prestige high) and the best students, which keeps entry competitive, means we can have higher standards in our courses, and course, if your graduates are more capable then the reputation of your institution is maintained.

You are wrong that universities are gaining from this. Mostly, at the best universities since these fees were introduced, academic staff have higher workload and less time for research (you might, if you’re not that familiar with the sector, be shocked to know that I deliver just 12 lectures a year. I have probably about 60-70 hours of other teaching stuff each year, and everything else is research or (sadly) admin crap. Admittedly my position is at one extreme).

Your idea that universities are ‘raking it in’ and benefitting from this not quite correct. Actually, for very many courses the fees do not cover the costs (for example, a science subject will need labs that can fit 100-150 students a time, and all the instruments and equipment and consumables needed for them. These are expensive things to build, equip, run and maintain).

Universities in England now charge those about £9k fees. The idea (from the government) when these were introduced was that price differentiation would occur across the sector - i.e. Coventry would be cheaper than Cambridge… It wasn’t, because all universities, while having flexibility to set their fees, set them at the cap. This probably reflected two things: i) historically undergraduate degrees are underfunded (especially in sciences, medicine, dentistry - the fees do not cover the costs), so the sector took the opportunity to get closer to cost recovery; ii) lots of universities took the opportunity to try to expand/grow - the £9k fees came with the removal of student recruitment caps (previously universities were told how many students they could recruit for each subject).

Anyway, what I am seeing quite a lot of on this thread is anger about fees and disbelief that it is good value. What you need to remember is that it wasn’t universities who decided this is how the sector should be run. They are operating under the operating conditions that the government set.

You might, like many in the sector, think that the idea of ‘marketising’ education is stupid (how can you really play the dual roles of educator/assessor/award conferring institution AND service provider for your students once they become customers? Isn’t there inherent, and problematic, tension here between taking somebody’s money to educate them AND also being the organisation that makes the assessment of their education?).

Or you might think that universities should just be privately run institution, much like public schools. totally reasonable position, but if your problem is with the current level of fees, this might not be the solution you are looking for.

Or you might think that university education just isn’t good value for money: there, you are wrong. If you work hard and select a good course and university, you will get extreme value. From a reductionist perspective, your earnings will be much higher. From a saner point of view, your life will be magnificently enriched by the time you have to spend engaging intellectually with exciting ideas and exciting people whilst you are at university. Your perspective on the world will shift. You will make friendships that will last the rest of your life, and you really will build the core of your character and personal philosophy that will be with you the rest of your life too. Even if, for some people, that personal philosophy is drinking 8 pints every Friday and Saturday night,.

Thanks - It’s always interesting reading posts from people who speak from first hand knowledge.