Is college pointless?

It's pointless in many cases. In the past, a lot of careers/jobs started out with apprenticeships where you would gradually learn your trade. I think something like this should be applied to many disciplines such as the sciences and engineering as an alternative or in conjunction to, college.

I know a few French people studying engineering and they have a system in their college (similiar to an IT in Ireland) of getting 6 weeks work, followed by 3 weeks college and alternating like that in their particular course (engineering) which I think is a good idea. Breaks up the difference between the world you will be entering and college.

Furthermore, a lot of what is taught may be very dry, or else, there may be a module that you feel that you won't use or whatever. It can kill your enthusiasm for your subject.

Maybe instead of getting people taught stuff that teachers think is useful, you could say, "ok so you want to study this discipline, so what do you want to be taught?":) That might be impractical, but I do think apprenticeship type teaching would be very useful compared to sitting in a lecture hall all day slowly going brain dead.

Very interesting and timely question.

I wouldn't go the whole hog and suggest we suddenly abolish third level education. However, I reckon we need to move towards more 'continuous education'. For most jobs a college degree isn't required. Its just a convienent way for employers to filter applicants. It says that the applicant is capable of agreeing to a contract of defined length and seeing it through. I'd also argue soft skills are likely to be better amongst graduates. The cost of this filter for employers is being borne by the employee in the form of loans and the taxpayer in the form of subsidies to universities. People continue to go to uni because of the belief that it will lead to better jobs, and on average it probably is still true.

If more training was available to employees on a continuing and on going basis from educational establishments then I reckon this would be a better configuration for all concerns. We do still need educational establishments, because of the networks they form and the reputational benefits that they bring. Accountancy is a good example, many people enter after college and are surprised to learn that they still have to do the many of the same exams that a high school graduate has to do. However, the high school grad will be finished the 'training' before the college grad starts. Why then are there so many college grads going to uni? Banking is similar.

To look at another way if we really do value what is learnt specifically at college then there is no reason not to move to more intensive college education. IMO most technical qualifications could be completed in two years if the student (and lecturer) worked full time i.e. no summer holidays. This would be of benefit to the student, allowing them to accrue less fees, but its of little benefit to the lecturer who is not currently incentivised to teach as much as possible (its not their only activity remember). However, this is unlikely to happen - and probably will never happen for 'elite' colleges. But it certainly could for second tier unis, or you could chop and change between colleges more easily. This is more feasible given the modular nature of things nowadays. I love the Open University model and would love to see it expanded.

There was a really good in our time on radio 4 recently that went over the formation of universities and what they were originally for. To summarise what I learnt - its not what we use them for now.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zf384/In_Our_Time_The_Medieval_University/

If you subscribe to the idea that colleges should solely churn out graduates for industrialists then yes, most of the education provided is pointless from their perspective. On the other hand there is the the knowledge for its own sake position. I think there may be too many people in education. I think a well educated populace is a great thing, a culture of education, learning and independent thinking is something that should be strongly encouraged but the tertiary education sector appears to be over saturated due in part I should think to bad policies, politics and profiteering/status seeking on the part of universities. In addition I think there are too many pointless courses designed solely to get money from students, but that is not to say that all new courses/disciplines outside of the traditional framework are pointless.

Or...maybe its just the growing pains of an advancing world, if you could read and write in the 10th century one was very educated relatively speaking. Now that societies are more complex and we have a greater wealth of knowledge to draw upon the standard is higher.

What do you think the purpose of college is permabear?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Any links to the complaints, just wondering how much of it is bluster and how much is real. If they were really concerned then surely they would vote with their feet and move somewhere else?

Also is it limited to particular fields e.g. comp sci or also to the quality of marketing graduate?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

OK. So, would you recommend a return to a two-tier system. Whereby the intellectual elite are left to get on with it in TCD, UCC, UCD, presumably the NUIs as well. They produce a small number of highly qualified graduates and the rest of the higher education needs are met elsewhere?

The focus of the argument thus far has been on meeting the needs of industry which is one (of many) aims of a university. However, you don't seem to be suggesting that all uni's are failing in this aim, just some of them? Would that be right?

Should we then try and "equal but different" approach? Degrees should be about critical thought and not about the actual content of what you learn.

Take for example a degree in accountancy. A contradiction in terms. No critical thought required. In the UK such "degrees" don't exist. Accountants in the big firms tend to have good degrees in varied subjects but not in accountancy. The firms use the degree as a method of benchmarking to hire the bright and interested young graduates who are capable of learning, and then teach them to balance the books.

My sister has a degree in accountancy and works as an accountant. To my mind that was a waste of 3 years of her life (although the Irish system expects that accountants have degrees in accountancy). She had 5 As in her leaving cert and is more than capable of critical thought, is interested in learning etc but the system dictated that if she wanted to be an accountant then she should study that particular drab meaningless subject at third level.

So my suggestion would be that we keep degrees for subjects requiring critical study, and create an alternative for subjects which are designed to equip people with the detailed knowledge required to work in a particular field.

It is then up to employers to determine whether they want to hire someone with a degree (as evidence of a standard of ability and critical thought) or "alternative" (as evidence of a level of knowledge in a particular area).

The obvious difficulties apply to law and medicine but both subjects require critical thought as well as detailed knowledge.

The BBC would agree with the geography student:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/middle_east/

I realise its not technically true.

Think its completely pointless for entrepreneurs so good call by Althucher and Thiel. I suggested something like this instead of college http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68492047 but was shot down as unworkable by most people. I guess with these guys it wouldn't be taking a risk with the taxpayer's money, though I often believe many college courses are a guaranteed waste of taxpayers money

Perhaps this is two big topics but universitíes IME seem to often suit lazy people who can get the bare minimum grades with last minute cramming for exams and all-nighters for assignments. Though they soon forget everything they learned in this process

Of course its not completely pointless, I'd say most medicine/engineering students work pretty hard, and those courses and some others you really do need a college education.

Things like degrees in film seem pointless to me and in all honesty should be covered done by apprenticeship not university