What do you think of the US Ambassador's comments about graduates in Ireland?

andrewire

Context:

The United States bluntly told the Republic's government that Ireland's education policies were not providing US firms with enough quality graduates.

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/us-complained-to-irish-pm-about-quality-of-graduates-15031578.html#ixzz18JgkLijl

----

Do you agree or disagree with that comment? I personally think he's right. I think some (not all) colleges and universities do not challenge you intellectually, they just limit themselves to 'teach the program' and that's it. It seems there's more emphasis on guidelines than actual learning. My personal experience tells me lecturers are more concerned about external examiners than what you learn in the classroom. For example, most of my lecturers always say: 'An examiner won't like that type of answer', etc. Is it all about my learning experience and not what the examiner will think?

orourkeda

Perhaps they should f*ck off and hire their own graduates then

digme

andrewire wrote: »

Context:

The United States bluntly told the Republic's government that Ireland's education policies were not providing US firms with enough quality graduates.

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/us-complained-to-irish-pm-about-quality-of-graduates-15031578.html#ixzz18JgkLijl

----

Do you agree or disagree with that comment? I personally think he's right. I think some (not all) colleges and universities do not challenge you intellectually, they just limit themselves to 'teach the program' and that's it. It seems there's more emphasis on guidelines than actual learning. My personal experience tells me lecturers are more concerned about external examiners than what you learn in the classroom. For example, most of my lecturers always say: 'An examiner won't like that type of answer', etc. Is it all about my learning experience and not what the examiner will think?

What does he mean by quality exactly?

Vorsprung

The multinationals have been saying this for years - the old list of 18 points detailing Ireland's competitiveness has been cut to one - our low corporation tax. All our seemingly great colleges are not quite up to scratch.

Nice to see that the Govt actually did something to improve the situation since that meeting 4 years ago.

What a bunch of twats!

gizmo

orourkeda wrote: »

Perhaps they should f*ck off and hire their own graduates then

You mean the multi-nationals in Ireland should hire American graduates and bring them in here rather than hiring Irish grads? Really?

WikiLeaks quotes the former ambassador as saying concerns over the supply of quality graduates were linked to limits on education funding, which derived from the Irish government's long-standing decision not to impose university tuition fees.

That to me is the most important part of this and it's what many people who are in favour of a delayed fees system point to when discussing the issue.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Where#s that thread wehre the guy wanted advice on staying awake for four days straight (one of them being a Monday, where he was determined to go out and get pissed) because he had to turn in three papers in said timeframe?

ChopShop

SO:

They like low tax.

They don't like lack of tax revenue to invest in education.
:rolleyes:

PeakOutput

they are dead right its been discussed to death in politics, generally it seems that people refuse to accept the facts and like to live on in blissfull ignorance believing we still have a decent education system they are the only ones who will suffer

PeakOutput

wernstrom! wrote: »

SO:

They like low tax.

They don't like lack of tax revenue to invest in education.
:rolleyes:

were does it say that?

Sticky_Fingers

It all depends on where you go to study, I have had experience in two separate institutions and the standard of teaching and level of commitment exhibited by the teaching staff was like night and day. In the more prestigious of the two it was all book learning and exams, very little thought given to the actual implementation and practical side of the work and the students were seen as a burden and a barely tolerated nuisance. I then went to do a follow on degree in an Institute of Technology (in the same city) and found it to be much much better. People have this opinion that IT's are somehow inferior to their big name cousins but I acquired more useful practical skills during my one year at an IT than I did during my four years in Uni.

orourkeda

gizmo wrote: »

You mean the multi-nationals in Ireland should hire American graduates and bring them in here rather than hiring Irish grads? Really?

If they are they are unhappy with the educational standards maybe they should relocate.

They may pay higher corporation tax but maybe that would be just another thing for them to bitch about. Perhaps this is more important to then than the educational attainment of their employees.

starbelgrade

Not a whole lot.

I didn't read them, as personally, I couldn't give a flying f*ck what he has to say.

Never even heard of him.

Brendog

During the Celtic Tiger they couldn't get enough of Irish Graduates.

After all American graduates are so great. Some of the finest in the world :rolleyes:

digme

Brendog wrote: »

During the Celtic Tiger they couldn't get enough of Irish Graduates.

After all American graduates are so great. Some of the finest in the world :rolleyes:

except china keeps beating the sh!t out of them in everything

Sticky_Fingers

Brendog wrote: »

During the Celtic Tiger they couldn't get enough of Irish Graduates.

After all American graduates are so great. Some of the finest in the world :rolleyes:

I think you will find that they have some of the best graduates in the world, many are foreign students but are educated in some of the finest Universities in the world.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

orourkeda wrote: »

If they are they are unhappy with the educational standards maybe they should relocate.

They may pay higher corporation tax but maybe that would be just another thing for them to bitch about. Perhaps this is more important to then than the educational attainment of their employees.

Are you seriously suggesting we might be better off with less employment and investment?

PeakOutput

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

It all depends on where you go to study, I have had experience in two separate institutions and the standard of teaching and level of commitment exhibited by the teaching staff was like night and day. In the more prestigious of the two it was all book learning and exams, very little thought given to the actual implementation and practical side of the work and the students were seen as a burden and a barely tolerated nuisance. I then went to do a follow on degree in an Institute of Technology (in the same city) and found it to be much much better. People have this opinion that IT's are somehow inferior to their big name cousins but I acquired more useful practical skills during my one year at an IT than I did during my four years in Uni.

this is a pretty bad explanation but,

thats how it is meant to be, if you study the same subject(software engineering) in and IT and a university you will get taught two completely different ways. universities are theory driven as their main objective is the advancement of knowledge(discovering new things, coming up with theories etc stuff like, were as an it is more about the practical implemenation of existing knowledge.

the lines are blurring but that is the traditional distinction

PeakOutput

digme wrote: »

except china keeps beating the sh!t out of them in everything

thats true, this year america dropped form number one to number 12 in the rankings that take into account the total quality of a countries univerisities. china moved to first

Tigger

i reckon you can get a degree here with about 800 hrs work

if i'd been chalanged in uni i'd have put in about 3200hrs work

so i see his point

Sticky_Fingers

PeakOutput wrote: »

this is a pretty bad explanation but,

thats how it is meant to be, if you study the same subject(software engineering) in and IT and a university you will get taught two completely different ways. universities are theory driven as their main objective is the advancement of knowledge(discovering new things, coming up with theories etc stuff like, were as an it is more about the practical implemenation of existing knowledge.

the lines are blurring but that is the traditional distinction

Thats complete horse manure. The Uni staff didn't give a flying f@ck about the students, we were a bothersome distraction to their research and treated us as such. The IT staff on the other hand actually took an interest in our projects (some of which were pretty impressive stuff). As for advancement of knowledge, some of the modules I studied in the IT doubled up with what I have done previously and I can vouch that there was no dumbing down or glossing over the details, if anything it was more detailed since the principles learned were used to show how stuff actually works. Book learning is all well and good but until you actually see how its been applied to the real world then its pretty useless.

PeakOutput

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Thats complete horse manure. The Uni staff didn't give a flying f@ck about the students, we were a bothersome distraction to their research and treated us as such. The IT staff on the other hand actually took an interest in our projects (some of which were pretty impressive stuff). As for advancement of knowledge, some of the modules I studied in the IT doubled up with what I have done previously and I can vouch that there was no dumbing down or glossing over the details, if anything it was more detailed since the principles learned were used to show how stuff actually works. Book learning is all well and good but until you actually see how its been applied to the real world then its pretty useless.

read what you just said again and then what i said and see how what you said dosnt contradict what i said at all

no university gives a **** about its undergrads, undergrads are a necessary evil in univerisities. at undergrad level university aims to teach you the basics of a given subject in a way that makes you learn it yourself and in the process teaches you how to do your own research and find things out for yourself etc. its all about post grad research and staff research. that is the main function of a university(traditionally) as i said the advancement of knowledge

the main function of an IT (traditionally) is to teach the practical application of this knowledge.

you can call it horse manure all you want but ask any lecturer what the main differences between a university and an it(iv been to both aswell by the way) are and they will tell you the same thing.

as i said the lines are blurring with the awarding of university status to some ITs

Wagon

America is officially the dumbest country in the world. So frankly, Mr American Ambassador can suck my fat hairy balls v:)v

Sticky_Fingers

PeakOutput wrote: »

read what you just said again and then what i said and see how what you said dosnt contradict what i said at all

no university gives a **** about its undergrads, undergrads are a necessary evil in univerisities. at undergrad level university aims to teach you the basics of a given subject in a way that makes you learn it yourself and in the process teaches you how to do your own research and find things out for yourself etc. its all about post grad research and staff research. that is the main function of a university(traditionally) as i said the advancement of knowledge

the main function of an IT (traditionally) is to teach the practical application of this knowledge.

you can call it horse manure all you want but ask any lecturer what the main differences between a university and an it(iv been to both aswell by the way) are and they will tell you the same thing.

as i said the lines are blurring with the awarding of university status to some ITs

As someone who has recently completed a Phd and worked for 4 years on the advancement of knowledge I can tell you first hand that my IT education was far more beneficial to me then my big name Uni one. Students can be a nuisance, I know because I have supervised them myself but that is part of the job. Its not a necessary evil, it is vital part of what universities are all about, without students there will be no new scientists, engineers, doctors or chemists. We need undergrads to get the best education possible because they will be the ones carrying on the work when we retire. Without good undergrads you don't get good post grads or researchers, its all very well to tell someone look it up in a book but sometimes it needs to be explained, not because the student is thick but because technical books can be extremely difficult to understand, many are written assuming you are already an expert on the subject.

Pawning a second rate and shoddy education on them because they just so happen to be on the lowest rung of the academic pecking order is scandalous. If a lecturers research work is so vital that he/she cannot be bothered to make time for their students or teach them properly then they have no place at any university.

Monty Burnz

PeakOutput wrote: »

thats true, this year america dropped form number one to number 12 in the rankings that take into account the total quality of a countries univerisities. china moved to first

Odd - as I understand it, China's 3rd level education sector is a shambles.

PeakOutput

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

As someone who has recently completed a Phd and worked for 4 years on the advancement of knowledge I can tell you first hand that my IT education was far more beneficial to me then my big name Uni one.

i never said anything about which is or isnt more beneficial

Students can be a nuisance, I know because I have supervised them myself but that is part of the job. Its not a necessary evil, it is vital part of what universities are all about

kinda like emmmm a necessary evil i should of said that lecturers can look at them as a necessary evil not the universities themselves, sorry.

Pawning a second rate and shoddy education on them because they just so happen to be on the lowest rung of the academic pecking order is scandalous. If a lecturers research work is so vital that he/she cannot be bothered to make time for their students or teach them properly then they have no place at any university.

i never said it was right either

PeakOutput

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Odd - as I understand it, China's 3rd level education sector is a shambles.

it was an american that was telling me about it ill try and find the rankings i havnt seen them myself

Dudess

I've always wondered about the "Extremely high standard of education" claim re Ireland. I mean, I'm sure it's all right, but extremely high? Based on what?

OPENROAD

Dudess wrote: »

I've always wondered about the "Extremely high standard of education" claim re Ireland. I mean, I'm sure it's all right, but extremely high? Based on what?

Is it not normally ourselves who go on about the education?

PeakOutput

Dudess wrote: »

I've always wondered about the "Extremely high standard of education" claim re Ireland. I mean, I'm sure it's all right, but extremely high? Based on what?

well we used to have a two universities in the top 100 in teh world now i think they are both out of the top 300 if not 500 could be wrong on that though

rankings arent the be all and end all i know and there is some great ground breaking research happening in irish universities and IT's but our undergraduates are atrocious.

PeakOutput

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Odd - as I understand it, China's 3rd level education sector is a shambles.

cant find anything on a quick google she must have been wrong, i noticed when i was looking into it this time last year that if you use non us ranking chinese / japanese / indian universities place far far better

OK, A US company insists that it wants the top 0.1% of the educated elite working for them!

Ireland population, 4 million (ish) top 0.1 = 4000 = not very many!
US population, 350 million (ish) top 0.1% = 350,000 = quite a few
Chinese population 1600 millipn (very ish) top 0.1% = 1.6 million = quite a lot!

The US ambassador's talking out of his arse!

karma_

PeakOutput wrote: »

they are dead right its been discussed to death in politics, generally it seems that people refuse to accept the facts and like to live on in blissfull ignorance believing we still have a decent education system they are the only ones who will suffer

Nonsense.

That is all.

Ficheall

Ah good. Perhaps we'll have less of this "knowledge economy" ****ehawking now.

PeakOutput

Deleted User wrote: »

OK, A US company insists that it wants the top 0.1% of the educated elite working for them!

were did you see that?

The US ambassador's talking out of his arse!

the ambassador said that the quality of irish graduates is not good enough for the american companies, presumably because they told him. it has nothing to do with percentages or quantity. if the quality was good enough they could find enough people to work for them here, they cant apparently. google in particular has said it wont recruit from specific universities as they have had such bad experiences with their graduates, its a ridicolous state of affairs

Jesus Wept

Yes he is right.
That is the problem with a almost free 3rd level education system. A lot of clowns go because it is the done thing, not because they are actually interested in the course they are enrolled in.

Overheal

orourkeda wrote: »

Perhaps they should f*ck off and hire their own graduates then

Because no politician cares about US Education because if the US Populace became too educated it would blow their minds. Keep 'em ignorant, keep 'em down. Irish Nationals can't run for public office afaik

PeakOutput

PeakOutput wrote: »

were did you see that?





the ambassador said that the quality of irish graduates is not good enough for the american companies, presumably because they told him. it has nothing to do with percentages or quantity. if the quality was good enough they could find enough people to work for them here, they cant apparently. google in particular has said it wont recruit from specific universities as they have had such bad experiences with their graduates, its a ridicolous state of affairs

In the real world on humanity, there are only so many people who could be considered the cream of the crop, that is what my original post was eluding to, inteligance is inherited, education is instilled into you.

If 3rd level education was given purly and 100% on merit, then there would be more genuine graduates, both here and elsewhere!

sdanseo

Our graduates are perfectly well qualified. What we lose in the fact that some courses are a bit on the easy side we gain in the fact that our standard of secondary education is undoubtedly higher. College for everyone means the courses can't be elitist (which has its own flaws, but nonetheless is truth, otherwise the failure rates would be very high).

The mere fact that this country is so utterly reliant on mainly American multinationals to prop up our pathetic little economy is proof of how meaningless and see-through our "Celtic Tiger" was, really. I'm strongly of the opinion that this relaince is unhealthy and in the long term unsustainable; we've already lost Dell almost totally and coutless jobs in others. Granted this is because they're greedy capitalist bastards but it doesn't change the fact that these guys can and will move to cheaper places and if anyone else lowers their tax rate they could destroy us.

It's like a quick quid loan really - moronic. We need to bolster our own indigenous businesses and export our talent and produce. Make Irish names the big multinationals, not just play mammy to the Americans.

the_monkey

andrewire wrote: »

Context:

The United States bluntly told the Republic's government that Ireland's education policies were not providing US firms with enough quality graduates.

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/us-complained-to-irish-pm-about-quality-of-graduates-15031578.html#ixzz18JgkLijl

----

Do you agree or disagree with that comment? I personally think he's right. I think some (not all) colleges and universities do not challenge you intellectually, they just limit themselves to 'teach the program' and that's it. It seems there's more emphasis on guidelines than actual learning. My personal experience tells me lecturers are more concerned about external examiners than what you learn in the classroom. For example, most of my lecturers always say: 'An examiner won't like that type of answer', etc. Is it all about my learning experience and not what the examiner will think?

WHAT ??????

From a f/cking american !!! The worst education system in the world !!

and there if you have money you get a top degree handed to you !!

un real ... just un-f*cking real, we have one of the best education systems in the world and some satan f*cking yank (evil of all the world and cause of all the wars) coming out with this CR*P!!!!!

Holybejaysus

If you want a very basic example of what the ambassador is referring to, check out some of the spelling on this thread for a start-then look at some of the replies from the intellectual midgets on this site. The first reply couldn't even articulate a point of view, but merely suggested the ambassador "**** off and hire their own graduates then". This response was thanked by a number of people. :rolleyes:

So yes, I would say the ambassador has a legitimate point. The multi-nationals are not going to dumb themselves down for you-it is up to you to raise your standards to theirs. Accept this advice, and you might get on in life.
Here endeth the lesson.

df1985

I see his point to be honest, people in my degree course (one of most respected courses in terms of business degress) got 2.1's or even better from 2-3 weeks of cramming for their finals and 6 months of drinking oursleves stupid. we had to work hard in january and may, and every now and then throw a project together in a few days when we'd been given a few weeks to do it, apart from that we would miss half the lectures from being hungover and watching daytime tv.

Napper Hawkins

Holybejaysus wrote: »

If you want a very basic example of what the ambassador is referring to, check out some of the spelling on this thread for a start-then look at some of the replies from the intellectual midgets on this site. The first reply couldn't even articulate a point of view, but merely suggested the ambassador "**** off and hire their own graduates then". This response was thanked by a number of people. :rolleyes:

So yes, I would say the ambassador has a legitimate point. The multi-nationals are not going to dumb themselves down for you-it is up to you to raise your standards to theirs. Accept this advice, and you might get on in life.
Here endeth the lesson.

Amen.

df1985

df1985 wrote: »

I see his point to be honest, people in my degree course (one of most respected courses in terms of business degress) got 2.1's or even better from 2-3 weeks of cramming for their finals and 6 months of drinking oursleves stupid. we had to work hard in january and may, and every now and then throw a project together in a few days when we'd been given a few weeks to do it, apart from that we would miss half the lectures from being hungover and watching daytime tv.

Is that not what college is about? It's not about learning everything but how you can apply what you know?

df1985

Deleted User wrote: »

Is that not what college is about? It's not about learning everything but how you can apply what you know?

Definately, i wouldnt change a minute of my time in college, but looking back we werent truly under an awful amount of strain. The pressure we felt at exam time wouldnt have been a problem if we had even done some work consistently during the year. I get the impression (could be wrong) that in other countries or even other courses that people are made work relentlessly week after week to get a decent degree-we didnt have to work that hard at all.I leanred enough to pass exams, not enough to say I had a very good broad knowledge of the course, which should be the point of a degree.

Yea he's right.. I'm a prime example of the farce that is university. I went to exactly 12 lectures in all of second year, about 15 in all of third year, did all nighters for almost all my subjects and now i've a good degree from a good university.

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

Yea he's right.. I'm a prime example of the farce that is university. I went to exactly 12 lectures in all of second year, about 15 in all of third year, did all nighters for almost all my subjects and now i've a good degree from a good university.

And yet you can't spell footpath.

PeakOutput

sdonn wrote: »

Our graduates are perfectly well qualified. What we lose in the fact that some courses are a bit on the easy side we gain in the fact that our standard of secondary education is undoubtedly higher. College for everyone means the courses can't be elitist (which has its own flaws, but nonetheless is truth, otherwise the failure rates would be very high).

The mere fact that this country is so utterly reliant on mainly American multinationals to prop up our pathetic little economy is proof of how meaningless and see-through our "Celtic Tiger" was, really. I'm strongly of the opinion that this relaince is unhealthy and in the long term unsustainable; we've already lost Dell almost totally and coutless jobs in others. Granted this is because they're greedy capitalist bastards but it doesn't change the fact that these guys can and will move to cheaper places and if anyone else lowers their tax rate they could destroy us.

It's like a quick quid loan really - moronic. We need to bolster our own indigenous businesses and export our talent and produce. Make Irish names the big multinationals, not just play mammy to the Americans.

the_monkey wrote: »

WHAT ??????

From a f/cking american !!! The worst education system in the world !!

and there if you have money you get a top degree handed to you !!

un real ... just un-f*cking real, we have one of the best education systems in the world and some satan f*cking yank (evil of all the world and cause of all the wars) coming out with this CR*P!!!!!

ignorance is bliss it seems

Noreen1

Hmm. Twenty years ago, companies invested in training to up-skill their employees.

Nowadays, they expect employees to pay a fortune in educational fees (in some cases) - so that said employees are "fit" to employ, in order to have the privilege of making a profit for "The Company"........

And yet said Company can relocate at any time.

It makes me wonder whether Companies would relocate so readily if they were actually expected to invest in training (worldwide) to a more significant level than at present.....

Just a thought!

Noreen

Lumen

Noreen, the whole job market is more dynamic now so employers have to be smarter about training or else their employees will just take the training then walk down the road to another employer with lower training costs and higher salaries.

w.r.t to the previous "Ireland is the bitch of the multinationals" argument, much of that is down to the politics of finding employment for the semi-skilled and semi-educated in a necessarily high-cost economy operating within a globalised marketplace.

There is lots of good stuff happening in the real smart economy, but unfortunately these sectors are quite small as a proportion of GDP.

Agriculture is also big but not very labour intensive.

The main problem facing all economies in the world, most particularly China, is what to do with all the stupid people now that we're not farming with pitchforks or building roads with shovels.

Biggins

andrewire wrote: »

Context:

The United States bluntly told the Republic's government that Ireland's education policies were not providing US firms with enough quality graduates.

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/us-complained-to-irish-pm-about-quality-of-graduates-15031578.html#ixzz18JgkLijl

----

Couldn't give a rats arse what America's state government now thinks.
They are morally corrupt from within and a shower of international thugs anyway! Fcuk 'em!

I don't exactly remember what the figures are but official figures (theirs!) shows their education system to be far, far more full of gobschites.
A lot of them can't even find Ireland on a world map!
No wonder their need to look abroad for better educated workers!

Where Does America Stand?

In 2002, UNICEF compared public education in twenty four nations around the world: the US ranked 18. Forty years ago America had the highest graduation rate: now America is ranked as the 19th. US 4th grade math grades have remained the same since 1995, while other countries have improved.

Source: The State of Education in the United States: Why America is Behind Other Countries http://www.suite101.com/content/the-state-of-education-in-the-united-states-a80716#ixzz18MBueGJy

The State of American Education: Not So Great

A new report about inner city graduation rates (.pdf) paints a pretty sobering picture, to put it mildly:

Our analysis finds that graduating from high school in the America’s largest cities amounts, essentially, to a coin toss. Only about one-half (52 percent) of students in the principal school systems of the 50 largest cities complete high school with a diploma.

Source: http://weblogg-ed.com/2008/the-state-of-american-education-not-so-great/

Interesting reading: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=1500338
By 2002 and 2008, their rankings has got even more worse!

Noreen1

Lumen wrote: »

Noreen, the whole job market is more dynamic now so employers have to be smarter about training or else their employees will just take the training then walk down the road to another employer with lower training costs and higher salaries.

w.r.t to the previous "Ireland is the bitch of the multinationals" argument, much of that is down to the politics of finding employment for the semi-skilled and semi-educated in a necessarily high-cost economy operating within a globalised marketplace.

There is lots of good stuff happening in the real smart economy, but unfortunately these sectors are quite small as a proportion of GDP.

Agriculture is also big but not very labour intensive.

The main problem facing all economies in the world, most particularly China, is what to do with all the stupid people now that we're not farming with pitchforks or building roads with shovels.

Yes, I'm aware that the job market is more dynamic - and that Global trade, with the resulting political ramifications is more inter-related than ever before.

It doesn't alter the fact that companies are increasing their profit levels at the expense of their employees - or that significant deterioration in training costs makes it significantly easier for a Company to relocate.

I'm not even suggesting that it's a situation that's easily resolved - just noting the development.

Noreen