Are we sending too many students to third level?

steddyeddy

We currently send more students to third level than any other country. The Irish Times asks is this a good thing. I think that ticking boxes just to get students into third level at record rates is a bad thing and more focus is needed in getting the right students to third level. It costs the country a lot to send students to universities and I think interviews could be a good way to decide if a student is right for a course. I also think that the Irish Times makes a good point of highlighting the artificial inequality that arises in the Irish education system. We need to switch to recognise social barriers to education.

The fact that we send more students to third level than any other country in the EU is often seen as a badge of honour.

The proportion of school-leavers going on to higher education ballooned from about 10 per cent in the 1960s to well over 60 per cent nowadays.

Ireland now has the highest proportion of young people with third-level qualifications across the EU.

But a new study released by the Higher Education Authority (HEA) on the volume of of students failing to progress beyond their first year of college highlights a flipside to this achievement : are we now sending too many to higher education?

Overall, some 5,800 students – or 14 per cent of all new entrants to third level – did not move on to their second year of their course.

These are encouraging figures when set against higher education systems across Europe.

Despite a decade of falling investment by the State in the sector – with reduced staff-to-student ratios and depleted student support services – third level colleges have managed to reduce non-progression rates overall in recent years.

However, dig a little deeper and there are alarming numbers of students who have scored lower Leaving Cert points and are falling through the cracks in the system.

Glaring inequities
These latest non-progression figures also highlight another stark side to the education system: how glaring inequities in society extend into academic performance.

Students from disadvantaged schools are almost twice as likely to fail to make it past their first year in college compared to those from fee-paying schools.

For all our talk of promoting access and equality, it is clear that students from more affluent backgrounds have a significant advantage over those from less-well-off homes.

There is also evidence of a class divide across many of our universities and institutes of technology. Almost a quarter of students from Trinity College Dublin and UCD are from fee-paying schools. The comparable figures for Athlone IT, Galway-Mayo IT and IT Tralee, for example, are below 1 per cent.

Geography is, of course, a factor given that most fee-paying schools are in south Dublin.

However, at IT Blanchardstown and IT Tallaght, between 4 and 8 per cent of students are from fee-paying schools.

Education, we know, has a unique capacity to break down cycles of disadvantage. If anything, our system seems to be replicating privilege.

The Government has spoken often about its aim of building a fair and compassionate society. The rhetoric of equality, however, can flow freely off the tongue.

While there are various strategies to improve the representation of working-class young people in higher education, they are modest by any measure. Much more ambition will be needed to tackle this class divide, backed up by proper funding and political will.

Whispered

I think that an assumption that third level is a requirement to be a useful member of society is a bad thing. I think kids should be encouraged to explore their interests and find their skills from early on. Build confidence and interest for kids, for some that'll come from academic pursuits, other physical or social. Too much emphasis on academia for the wrong pupil is not a good thing, of course it's important, but it's not the right fit for everyone.

I don't know if we send too many to third level, but I would like to see more of an emphasis than we currently have, on other options.

Edit: although, that's just my experience which is obviously shaped by my social circle and experiences so...... *shrugs*

Owryan

I think there is too much pressure on young people to go to college and enter a profession, esp if they are still trying to find out what they want to do.

I'm 43 and a mature student, just finished my honours year, it was obvious from 1st year that many "kids" on the course had no idea what they wanted to do, what the course was about and were only there's because it was expected of them.

TheValeyard

I dont see it as a problem, but rather another opportunity for people to broaden their horizons and experience new things. Gain new understandings, perspective, knowledge and social circles. All this benefits society.

Gravelly

Definitely. If we improved our apprenticeship system (and I believe there are some positive moves in that direction) to be more like, say, the German model, we would have far more 20-somethings who are out earning a living and contributing to society and the economy, as well as having less stress, worry, and debt themselves. It would also give people who don't get enough points for certain courses (esp. in the engineering field) the chance to work up to qualified engineer level through the apprenticeship route.
I'm told by our HR head that around 40% of the graduate CV's we get sent for job opportunities have degrees that are essentially useless.

I think we are to an extent, but I wouldn't change it.

Atoms for Peace

There's seems to be an increasing amount of either irrelevant or oversold courses being offered by the IT's.
Rather than stick to core STEM subjects, which was their raison d'etre, they're chasing numbers.

wexie

No it's all grand...

Till we start running out of plumbers, sparkies, chippies, mechanics and all those that is.

Then it won't be so grand anymore

Also I'd love to know what the hell we're going to do with all these gender studies graduates

One eyed Jack

Without the more affluent parents being able to afford to give their children a third level education, the same institutions wouldn't be able to afford to give third level education to young people from backgrounds whose parents can't afford third level education.

Some people have more opportunities than others, and some people can afford a better quality education than others, and the idea of appealing to the lowest common denominator as the standard by which everyone should be treated is never likely to lead to social progress, it actually stunts social mobility as it gives people nothing to aspire to.

steddyeddy

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

There's seems to be an increasing amount of either irrelevant or oversold courses being offered by the IT's.
Rather than stick to core STEM subjects, which was their raison d'etre, they're chasing numbers.

Well there's actually a lot of STEM students now. A lot of them just enrolling because there's jobs in the area rather than a general interest in the subject. As a result science has one of the highest drop out rates. You can't just enroll for the job factor.

steddyeddy

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Without the more affluent parents being able to afford to give their children a third level education, the same institutions wouldn't be able to afford to give third level education to young people from backgrounds whose parents can't afford third level education.

Some people have more opportunities than others, and some people can afford a better quality education than others, and the idea of appealing to the lowest common denominator as the standard by which everyone should be treated is never likely to lead to social progress, it actually stunts social mobility as it gives people nothing to aspire to.

Jack third level fees are paid for by the state no matter how well off your parents are. Registration fees aren't covered but they're not large.

y0ssar1an22

IMO colleges invent these third level degrees with the promise of a great job. in reality they're just after the ~13k they charge you. unfortunately most people have been fooled and think they need one. maybe its the employers who have been fooled.

and now i realise i'm talking about masters degrees. but the point still stands

steddyeddy

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

IMO colleges invent these third level degrees with the promise of a great job. in reality they're just after the ~13k they charge you. unfortunately most people have been fooled and think they need one. maybe its the employers who have been fooled.

and now i realise i'm talking about masters degrees. but the point still stands

A lot of masters degrees are just a money making scheme. Unfortunately masters degrees are used to filter out students for further education and employment.

Odhinn

Gravelly wrote: »

Definitely. If we improved our apprenticeship system (and I believe there are some positive moves in that direction) to be more like, say, the German model, we would have far more 20-somethings who are out earning a living and contributing to society and the economy, as well as having less stress, worry, and debt themselves. It would also give people who don't get enough points for certain courses (esp. in the engineering field) the chance to work up to qualified engineer level through the apprenticeship route.
I'm told by our HR head that around 40% of the graduate CV's we get sent for job opportunities have degrees that are essentially useless.

^
^
^
The above. It's all well and good having third level there for those who need and want it, but more often than not its a status symbol, driven by parents.

steddyeddy

Odhinn wrote: »

^
^
^
The above. It's all well and good having third level there for those who need and want it, but more often than not its a status symbol, driven by parents.

This exactly. Third level isn't for everyone but a lot of schools fail to mention this.

riffmongous

How does that first year non- progression rate compare to other countries?

CelticRambler

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Some people have more opportunities than others, and some people can afford a better quality education than others, and the idea of appealing to the lowest common denominator as the standard by which everyone should be treated is never likely to lead to social progress, it actually stunts social mobility as it gives people nothing to aspire to.

This "lowest common denominator" - or "equal opportunity for everyone" as it's promoted in France - is currently causing huge problems here. If you get a pass in your Baccalauréat, you're guaranteed a place in university, so guess what? Thousands of French teens go to university with no idea of what they want to do.


There's a 60% drop-out rate amongst first-years and the universities themselves are pretty dire. We've just finished a month of faculty occupations by disgruntled students, protesting about a proposal to bring in a certain amount of selection/competition for places. In typical French fashion, the protesting students decided the best way to make their point was to destroy their universities (estimates range from about 10-500 million €) including one that had just undergone a comprehensive refurbishment.


As it happened, I was hanging out with a bunch of French university graduates over the same period, and discussing the topic it was clear that Irish students have access to a gold-plated "added value" third-level experience, which most of them probably don't appreciate, but the benefit is obvious when you meet Irish graduates any where else in Europe.



So for all the supposed faults in the Leaving Cert and the CAO system, Ireland still deserves it's reputation as the Island of Saints and Scholars.

suicide_circus

It's always amazing the amount of people who come out of college practically illiterate.

Roger Hassenforder

 "third level colleges have managed to reduce non-progression rates overall in recent years."

In other words they dumbed it down?

wexie

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

 "third level colleges have managed to reduce non-progression rates overall in recent years."

In other words they dumbed it down?

that's kinda how I interpreted it.

And that's not really the way forward I'd have thought

steddyeddy

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

 "third level colleges have managed to reduce non-progression rates overall in recent years."

In other words they dumbed it down?

We can't assume that but it is the most likely scenario. The other possibility being that students are actually doing courses they're interested in.

Apocalypticism

interviews for college? so what the **** are leaving cert points for you fool?
Why would student be dependent on some fkrs and if they have a bad day they may destroy someones life.

steddyeddy

Apocalypticism wrote: »

interviews for college? so what the **** are leaving cert points for you fool?
Why would student be dependent on some fkrs and if they have a bad day they may destroy someones life.

You don't strike me as someone who would do well in interviews to be honest.

Bitches Be Trypsin

steddyeddy wrote: »

Jack third level fees are paid for by the state no matter how well off your parents are. Registration fees aren't covered but they're not large.

3K x 4 years is 12K, how is that not large? That's without factoring in rent, textbooks etc

steddyeddy

Bitches Be Trypsin wrote: »

3K x 4 years is 12K, how is that not large? That's without factoring in rent, textbooks etc

12K for a four year science degree Vs a multiple of thst in the UK? No, it's not that large. Everyone pays rent. A lot do it without parental support.

Bitches Be Trypsin

steddyeddy wrote: »

12K for a four year science degree Vs a multiple of thst in the UK? No, it's not that large. Everyone pays rent. A lot do it without parental support.

I said nothing about parental support?

hatrickpatrick

steddyeddy wrote: »

12K for a four year science degree Vs a multiple of thst in the UK? No, it's not that large. Everyone pays rent. A lot do it without parental support.

Moronic argument tbh, the UK is the highest by a factor of four - the second highest being ourselves.

http://www.thejournal.ie/college-fees-ireland-3675177-Nov2017/

Owryan

sugarman wrote: »

I think the blame mostly lies with modern employers in Ireland, making degrees a requirement for jobs that didnt need them in the past ...and still dont need them.

^this. I was thinking of applying for a relief position with a company that provides supervised parent/child access. They wanted applicants to have at least a masters!!!! Last year a level 7 was enough.

Similarly some of the home care companies are looking for degrees when fetac level 5-6 used to be enough. There is definitely an element of inflation regarding qualifications.

steddyeddy

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Moronic argument tbh, the UK is the highest by a factor of four - the second highest being ourselves.

http://www.thejournal.ie/college-fees-ireland-3675177-Nov2017/

And if you can't afford you don't pay. Simple as.

steddyeddy

CelticRambler wrote: »

This "lowest common denominator" - or "equal opportunity for everyone" as it's promoted in France - is currently causing huge problems here. If you get a pass in your Baccalauréat, you're guaranteed a place in university, so guess what? Thousands of French teens go to university with no idea of what they want to do.


There's a 60% drop-out rate amongst first-years and the universities themselves are pretty dire. We've just finished a month of faculty occupations by disgruntled students, protesting about a proposal to bring in a certain amount of selection/competition for places. In typical French fashion, the protesting students decided the best way to make their point was to destroy their universities (estimates range from about 10-500 million €) including one that had just undergone a comprehensive refurbishment.


As it happened, I was hanging out with a bunch of French university graduates over the same period, and discussing the topic it was clear that Irish students have access to a gold-plated "added value" third-level experience, which most of them probably don't appreciate, but the benefit is obvious when you meet Irish graduates any where else in Europe.



So for all the supposed faults in the Leaving Cert and the CAO system, Ireland still deserves it's reputation as the Island of Saints and Scholars.

Of course selection is key, but selection by leaving cert points alone doesn't give an accurate reflection of suitability for a course IMHO.

hatrickpatrick

steddyeddy wrote: »

And if you can't afford you don't pay. Simple as.

The point I'm making is, why does Ireland always have to be so God damn expensive for everything compared with the rest of Europe? It's infuriating.