Snobbery in education.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Gyalist

steddyeddy wrote: »

I have indirect experience with US institutions and I think the situation in the UK is better. Graduates from UK universities seem more well rounded. There's a tendency in the US to become super focused on one area. For instance a biochem grad in the UK will have more genetics knowledge than a US biochem grad.

Your observation flies in the face of all known facts. In the UK students concentrate on 3 or 4 subjects for A levels and that concentration carries on at university. In the US system even a science graduate has to fulfill arts prerequisites in order to graduate. It follows that the opposite of your observation is true.

222233

No divide, only time it's acceptable imo is if you have someone who is not capable of completing jobs to a very high standard due to a lack of education

Avatar MIA

IT Versus Uni degree. PFFFT.

Professional exams are where it's at.

steddyeddy

Gyalist wrote: »

Your observation flies in the face of all known facts. In the UK students concentrate on 3 or 4 subjects for A levels and that concentration carries on at university. In the US system even a science graduate has to fulfill arts prerequisites in order to graduate. It follows that the opposite of your observation is true.

I don't think you understand what I'm talking about. Take my biochem analogy and reply to it rather than a tangent about A levels.

Gyalist

Gyalist wrote: »

Your observation flies in the face of all known facts. In the UK students concentrate on 3 or 4 subjects for A levels and that concentration carries on at university. In the US system even a science graduate has to fulfill arts prerequisites in order to graduate. It follows that the opposite of your observation is true.

I can confirm this, having had experience of both the US and UK.

steddyeddy

Not with science you can't. The UK education system at second and third level is better.

RedemptionZ

steddyeddy wrote: »

But in that light what's wrong with people saying that science degrees are harder and produce a higher calibre of graduate?

How can you possibly say that though? What makes the science degree holder a higher calibre graduate? How do you know science degrees are harder? Are you Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory?

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Not with science you can't. The UK education system at second and third level is better.

Do you have direct experience of both to make that comparison?

Gyalist

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't think you understand what I'm talking about. Take my biochem analogy and reply to it rather than a tangent about A levels.

I understand what you are saying. This is what you said:

Graduates from UK universities seem more well rounded. There's a tendency in the US to become super focused on one area.

That's not possible when you have to complete a set amount of arts electives to complete a science degree, and the reverse is also true for arts graduates from US universities. It is the UK system that forces you to concentrate on a narrow area from about the age of 16.

steddyeddy

Gyalist wrote: »

I understand what you are saying. This is what you said:


That's not possible when you have to complete a set amount of arts electives to complete a science degree, and the reverse is also true for arts graduates from US universities. It is the UK system that forces you to concentrate on a narrow area from about the age of 16.

Yea great but how narrow is there science education? What experience have you with American science graduates?

steddyeddy

Candie wrote: »

Do you have direct experience of both to make that comparison?

Yes I currently work with both UK and US science graduates.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes I currently work with both UK and US science graduates.

That's not direct experience. So, no?

steddyeddy

Candie wrote: »

That's not direct experience. So, no?

Yes it is. As I said I find one graduate more specialised than the other. The US grads seem less likely to sway outside their field.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes it is. As I said I find one graduate more specialised than the other. The US grads seem less likely to sway outside their field.

I have a Japanese student. Does that mean I have direct experience of the Japanese second and third level education system? I also have a Ukrainian student, so I guess I have direct experience of that too.

I don't think so.

Any direct experience of either? Never mind, I can guess.

Your experience is limited to second hand experience of a small sample of students, and that makes this a pointless discussion, I'm out.

dublinman1990

Chickarooney wrote: »

I'd bet the majority of people who are splitting hairs over where your degree came from are spending too much time thinking about the shlt that doesn't matter and less time focusing on becoming successful.

Someone close to me began his career with a Fas course. He's now 35 and earning 200,000 a year. He doesn't spend time worrying that he didn't get a degree in the right college and when he's hiring staff he doesn't give a toss about where their education came from as long as they have the qualification and experience required.

Agree with all of what you said. Education snobbery is just a myth that is just there to put someone else down to their level so they can feel 'good' about themselves.

A good while ago FAS had changed to Solas. Not that it makes any difference to the organisation as a whole; it does provide for me great tools to get experience to further progress your studies or go straight into the workplace. The teachers in these courses from level 5 & upwards are industry professionals. They have vast experience in their fields because they have that experience from running their own businesses in the past. They give themselves plenty of opportunities to pass on those skills to their students with many of them getting great prospects of getting a well paid job as they progress through their exams.

That is the advantages of doing training courses as they on a par with coming from an IT. They give you the confidence to use these skills when in your in a job situation.

My own situation is that I'm doing a course doing Graphic Design for Print which is a level 5 that is equal to a Honours LC. I have applied for a level 6 BTEC HND (Higher National Diploma) course in Graphic Design. I'm hopeful to start in a few months time as I had an interview for the course on Thursday & it went very well. I'm awaiting a response from the interviewer in a few weeks time. Hopefully all will go well. It took me 4 years after the LC to begin the level 5 course in Graphic Design. I'm able to do the current course well as out of 6 modules completed out of 8 in total; I have gotten 4 Distinctions & 2 Merits so far which still allows me on track to getting a full certificate with 2 modules to go. So Happy days.

Also fair play for what your friend has achieved during his career. What job does he do to earn that type of money? It sounds like a highly skilled one at that.

steddyeddy

Candie wrote: »

The reputation of the Uni is dependent on them churning out the leaders of tomorrow, when you're talking Ivy League or Pac 10 anyway.

They take the best, give them the best education (because they can, with all the money and best faculty etc), and we're not supposed to acknowledge that because of all those advantages they produce the notable graduates?

How is that comparable to dismissing someones education as un - or less - worthy?

You talked about a higher calibre of graduates. If there is a higher calibre then that means there must be a lower calibre.

As with degree choices if someone picks modern dance vs quantum mechanics then I assume the latter will have dealt with more difficult concepts.

I'm in agreement with Eugene when I say if you're going to have the opinion that some graduates are "higher calibre" based on their alma mater then it's equally fair to assign calibre based on degree choice.

Neither of which is what I want to know when I take on students. Of primary concern to me is self directed learning and their interest.

steddyeddy

Candie wrote: »

I have a Japanese student. Does that mean I have direct experience of the Japanese second and third level education system? I also have a Ukrainian student, so I guess I have direct experience of that too.

I don't think so.

Any direct experience of either? Never mind, I can guess.

Your experience is limited to second hand experience of a small sample of students, and that makes this a pointless discussion, I'm out.

Yes you seem to withdraw from disagreements quite frequently so that doesn't surprise me.

But anyway for all others reading I'm a research scientist meaning I depend on a team of UK and US scientists. The UK scientists are far more independent thinking and versatile than the US grads in my experience.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

You talked about a higher calibre of graduates. If there is a higher calibre then that means there must be a lower calibre.

As with degree choices if someone picks modern dance vs quantum mechanics then I assume the latter will have dealt with more difficult concepts.

Graduates of universities with worldwide competition for places who are the creme de la creme of applicants and receive a world class education will be higher calibre graduates. That is indisputable, and what prestige unis earn their reputations upon.

A student of quantum mechanics may very well be cleverer than a dance student, but also may very well not be. Like a plumber might be smarter than the surgeon who replaces his hip. You cannot assume.

I'm in agreement with Eugene when I say if you're going to have the opinion that some graduates are "higher calibre" based on their alma mater then it's equally fair to assign calibre based on degree choice.

You are assuming that a person who chooses to study dance over physics is less able. There is no evidence to support that, the only evidence available is that one prefers to study dance, and the other physics. Anything else is assumption, nothing more.

Neither of which is what I want to know when I take on students. Of primary concern to me is self directed learning and their interest.

Good, that means I got the wrong impression when you said -

All and all most science graduates would be of higher calibre than philosophy students

- because that sounded like you think science graduates are better just because they're science graduates. Which I'm sure you agree is utterly ridiculous.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes you seem to withdraw from disagreements quite frequently so that doesn't surprise me.

But anyway for all others reading I'm a research scientist meaning I depend on a team of UK and US scientists. The UK scientists are far more independent thinking and versatile than the US grads in my experience.

See above Eddy.

I'll ignore the pettiness.

Icemancometh

I have a technical education myself, from one of the Universities in Ireland (not sure if medicine is included in STEM, but I don't think it is). This has given me entry into a well remunerated career, with it's associated pressures and responsibilities. But am I better educated then an Arts graduate? I earn more (probably), but that is hardly a good reflection on education. I know little of philosophy, sociology, anthropology, history, geography, languages, fine art, music, literature, mathematics, computer science, physics and many other areas I can't even think of. Given this depth of ignorance, how could I be a snob?

Icemancometh

Icemancometh wrote: »

I have a technical education myself, from one of the Universities in Ireland (not sure if medicine is included in STEM, but I don't think it is). This has given me entry into a well remunerated career, with it's associated pressures and responsibilities. But am I better educated then an Arts graduate? I earn more (probably), but that is hardly a good reflection on education. I know little of philosophy, sociology, anthropology, history, geography, languages, fine art, music, literature, mathematics, computer science, physics and many other areas I can't even think of. Given this depth of ignorance, how could I be a snob?

The greater part of having an informed opinion is realising the things you aren't informed about.

pragmatic1

Candie wrote: »

Do you have direct experience of both to make that comparison?

In fairness Cambridge University would now be the world leader when it comes to Biotechnology. Thanks in great part to the work done by a Donegal man.

Panthro

The nuns who ran our secondary school taught us sex Ed.
Like they had any qualifications on the subject!

pragmatic1

Panthro wrote: »

The nuns who ran our secondary school taught us sex Ed.
Like they had any qualifications on the subject!

That must have been awkward.

steddyeddy

The fact is STEM degrees are seen as a better degree to have and some universities are seen as being better. Some degrees are seen as being more difficult than others likewise some universities have bigger workloads. Those statements are very similar and you can't criticise someone for holding one belief while you hold the other.

steddyeddy

Before I deal with the other points I'll point out that just as universities require higher points or requirements so to do some degrees.

One eyed Jack

steddyeddy wrote: »

The fact is STEM degrees are seen as a better degree to have and some universities are seen as being better. Some degrees are seen as being more difficult than others likewise some universities have bigger workloads. Those statements are very similar and you can't criticise someone for holding one belief while you hold the other.

They're seen as a better degree by whom though eddy? And when you say 'better', by whose standard are you making that judgement?

The difficulty in obtaining any qualifications in any country, comes down to the individual, and the US system, the UK system and the Irish system, even the French system of education and qualifications, they're all very different from each other.

I don't think comparisons even between fields of study in different educational institutions are actually all that useful, because at the end of the day, for most people, generally speaking, the decision as to how relevant their qualifications and experience is, is going to be down to the people looking to employ them.

To say that any field of study, be it biochemistry or ballet, is more or less difficult than another is a bit silly when there really isn't any comparison between the two, and that's even before we discuss career opportunities of either.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

The fact is STEM degrees are seen as a better degree to have and some universities are seen as being better. Some degrees are seen as being more difficult than others likewise some universities have bigger workloads. Those statements are very similar and you can't criticise someone for holding one belief while you hold the other.

I've never met anybody who thinks STEM degrees are better. Just because you studied science, it does not mean it's better and more difficult than other degrees. Some universities are certainly better than others (I don't think anyone can argue with that, an undergraduate Oxbridge degree would beat almost any Irish degree) but it is not a fact that STEM degrees are seen as a better degree to have. They may be to some people like a hiring manager in a lab maybe, just as a French degree is seen as better to a hiring manager for a linguistic role and just as a journalism course is seen as better to a hiring manager for any media roles.

steddyeddy

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They're seen as a better degree by whom though eddy? And when you say 'better', by whose standard are you making that judgement?

The difficulty in obtaining any qualifications in any country, comes down to the individual, and the US system, the UK system and the Irish system, even the French system of education and qualifications, they're all very different from each other.

I don't think comparisons even between fields of study in different educational institutions are actually all that useful, because at the end of the day, for most people, generally speaking, the decision as to how relevant their qualifications and experience is, is going to be down to the people looking to employ them.

To say that any field of study, be it biochemistry or ballet, is more or less difficult than another is a bit silly when there really isn't any comparison between the two, and that's even before we discuss career opportunities of either.

I'll put it this way Jack the basis of what I'm saying is it is equally factual to say some degrees are harder to get into and complete and some universities are harder to get into and complete.

Some people are displaying massive cognitive dissonance on the issue.