The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Is having a degree or other qualifications important?
Does it matter whether you have that little piece of paper which tells the world you managed to get through 3-4 years of studying really mean anything in the real world?
Employers will always ask you what qualification you have, partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
There is, of course, the argument that you will actually pick up some life skills at University, though these tend to involve things like how to make £20 last 2 more weeks and how to cope with a hangover or ways to hand in your work past the deadline. Work skills require experience of working, though, and many people go straight into university without having any of this.
But it must count for something if Employers still firmly believe in a system of scoring to show how intelligent you are. I certainly learnt from my years at university, but it’s hard to say whether I learnt anything that would be useful in my current role at work. I was lucky enough to have 3 years of working behind me before I even went to University. This helped prepare me for what was to come.
But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing? Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience in education?
Does it matter whether you have that little piece of paper which tells the world you managed to get through 3-4 years of studying really mean anything in the real world?
Employers will always ask you what qualification you have, partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
There is, of course, the argument that you will actually pick up some life skills at University, though these tend to involve things like how to make £20 last 2 more weeks and how to cope with a hangover or ways to hand in your work past the deadline. Work skills require experience of working, though, and many people go straight into university without having any of this.
But it must count for something if Employers still firmly believe in a system of scoring to show how intelligent you are. I certainly learnt from my years at university, but it’s hard to say whether I learnt anything that would be useful in my current role at work. I was lucky enough to have 3 years of working behind me before I even went to University. This helped prepare me for what was to come.
But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing? Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience in education?
Page:
Is having a degree or other qualifications important?
Does it matter whether you have that little piece of paper which tells the world you managed to get through 3-4 years of studying really mean anything in the real world?
Employers will always ask you what qualification you have, partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
There is, of course, the argument that you will actually pick up some life skills at University, though these tend to involve things like how to make £20 last 2 more weeks and how to cope with a hangover or ways to hand in your work past the deadline. Work skills require experience of working, though, and many people go straight into university without having any of this.
But it must count for something if Employers still firmly believe in a system of scoring to show how intelligent you are. I certainly learnt from my years at university, but it’s hard to say whether I learnt anything that would be useful in my current role at work. I was lucky enough to have 3 years of working behind me before I even went to University. This helped prepare me for what was to come.
But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing? Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience in education?
Does it matter whether you have that little piece of paper which tells the world you managed to get through 3-4 years of studying really mean anything in the real world?
Employers will always ask you what qualification you have, partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
There is, of course, the argument that you will actually pick up some life skills at University, though these tend to involve things like how to make £20 last 2 more weeks and how to cope with a hangover or ways to hand in your work past the deadline. Work skills require experience of working, though, and many people go straight into university without having any of this.
But it must count for something if Employers still firmly believe in a system of scoring to show how intelligent you are. I certainly learnt from my years at university, but it’s hard to say whether I learnt anything that would be useful in my current role at work. I was lucky enough to have 3 years of working behind me before I even went to University. This helped prepare me for what was to come.
But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing? Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience in education?
pb wrote:
> Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience
> in education?
Yes, definitely. As an ex-employer the most important piece of paper you could stick in front of my nose to get the job (aside from cash, which doesn't work) was a full clean driving licence. The reason we held job interviews wasn't to check your degree certificate (which any bright spark can photoshop), it was to see if you were normal and would fit in with the other normal people we employed.
And the section on your CV about hobbies and interests? VITAL!
And here's a tip: We never used to ask questions like "So what was your thesis about?" to check level of intelligence, we'd ask questions like "So what do you think of the current situation in Darfur?" or "If money were no object how would you tackle global warming?" or "What are your views on Iraq?" to see how intelligence was put to use.
Having said that there are some recent changes to the curriculum that make sense, e.g. kids don't just learn about God in R.E., they learn about all religions, which is a lot more sensible. If I could I'd add an hour a week of learning how to change plugs, make a decent cup of tea, how to fill in forms like P45 correctly, health and safety, human rights and how they can't be used as an excuse not to do your job and "How to get on with people and not rub them up the wrong way because you think you know it all in your first job."
> Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience
> in education?
Yes, definitely. As an ex-employer the most important piece of paper you could stick in front of my nose to get the job (aside from cash, which doesn't work) was a full clean driving licence. The reason we held job interviews wasn't to check your degree certificate (which any bright spark can photoshop), it was to see if you were normal and would fit in with the other normal people we employed.
And the section on your CV about hobbies and interests? VITAL!
And here's a tip: We never used to ask questions like "So what was your thesis about?" to check level of intelligence, we'd ask questions like "So what do you think of the current situation in Darfur?" or "If money were no object how would you tackle global warming?" or "What are your views on Iraq?" to see how intelligence was put to use.
Having said that there are some recent changes to the curriculum that make sense, e.g. kids don't just learn about God in R.E., they learn about all religions, which is a lot more sensible. If I could I'd add an hour a week of learning how to change plugs, make a decent cup of tea, how to fill in forms like P45 correctly, health and safety, human rights and how they can't be used as an excuse not to do your job and "How to get on with people and not rub them up the wrong way because you think you know it all in your first job."
My philosophy is that a standard test or exam can only find out what you remember for definite, and not what you understand.
Chaos wrote:
> My philosophy is that a standard test or exam can only find out
> what you remember for definite, and not what you
> understand.
Unless its an exam that tests what you understand of course. ;)
> My philosophy is that a standard test or exam can only find out
> what you remember for definite, and not what you
> understand.
Unless its an exam that tests what you understand of course. ;)
pb wrote:
> Is having a degree or other qualifications important?
>
> Does it matter whether you have that little piece of paper which
> tells the world you managed to get through 3-4 years of studying
> really mean anything in the real world?
>
yes
> Employers will always ask you what qualification you have,
> partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at
> something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills
> any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
>
At uni you're supposed to get basic understanding of modern concepts. I mean, to prepare candidates for the right mentality, skills to learn. Additionally, its that degree that you have to jam your foot in the door. Someone with a degree is better off then someone who hasn't
> There is, of course, the argument that you will actually pick up
> some life skills at University, though these tend to involve
> things like how to make £20 last 2 more weeks and how to
> cope with a hangover or ways to hand in your work past the
> deadline. Work skills require experience of working, though,
> and many people go straight into university without having any
> of this.
>
Actually you would say that but it also prepares people to leaving and moving away from home. Its also working on the social factor such as communication, team work, organisation skills etc.
> But it must count for something if Employers still firmly
> believe in a system of scoring to show how intelligent you are.
> I certainly learnt from my years at university, but it’s hard to
> say whether I learnt anything that would be useful in my current
> role at work. I was lucky enough to have 3 years of working
> behind me before I even went to University. This helped prepare
> me for what was to come.
The problem now is that there are so many grads, employers are given the luxary of choosing the best people. Hence the dreaded aptitude and psychometric tests that scientifically accesses how good each candidate really is. They also add in the human factor as well to see how well you would gel into a team. Oh but having relevant exp, hobbies outside of work and being a special person helps.
> But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from
> SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any
> less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing?
> Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience
> in education?
Being someone who went to do A-levels. Somehow it hasn't prepared me as well for uni. Those that went to college got hands on experience on some coding whilst those at alevel merely did more the theory based stuff. Its the alevels ad other grades from your high school years that determines partially where you go in uni. Its a sad story that many people would prefer those who went to well established unis rather then those who went to newer unis. When in fact the newer unis do just as well in most cases or even better as they teach more modern ideas or even provide additional on the side subjects like business or social factors to your work. I have to admit, going to uni was great. i've learnt a good amount of coding, its taught me the importance of working in a team and communicating, put me into the correct mentality for any IT based jobs, the various basic methods of developing software and also making me very organised. Hell by the end of the 3rd year i was handing assignments early rather then on deadlines.
But lets not forget, having work exp (espeically relevant ones) is every bit as important. To neglect this side is to spell disaster.
Now i must pray that i've got my job. I really do want this job.
> Is having a degree or other qualifications important?
>
> Does it matter whether you have that little piece of paper which
> tells the world you managed to get through 3-4 years of studying
> really mean anything in the real world?
>
yes
> Employers will always ask you what qualification you have,
> partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at
> something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills
> any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
>
At uni you're supposed to get basic understanding of modern concepts. I mean, to prepare candidates for the right mentality, skills to learn. Additionally, its that degree that you have to jam your foot in the door. Someone with a degree is better off then someone who hasn't
> There is, of course, the argument that you will actually pick up
> some life skills at University, though these tend to involve
> things like how to make £20 last 2 more weeks and how to
> cope with a hangover or ways to hand in your work past the
> deadline. Work skills require experience of working, though,
> and many people go straight into university without having any
> of this.
>
Actually you would say that but it also prepares people to leaving and moving away from home. Its also working on the social factor such as communication, team work, organisation skills etc.
> But it must count for something if Employers still firmly
> believe in a system of scoring to show how intelligent you are.
> I certainly learnt from my years at university, but it’s hard to
> say whether I learnt anything that would be useful in my current
> role at work. I was lucky enough to have 3 years of working
> behind me before I even went to University. This helped prepare
> me for what was to come.
The problem now is that there are so many grads, employers are given the luxary of choosing the best people. Hence the dreaded aptitude and psychometric tests that scientifically accesses how good each candidate really is. They also add in the human factor as well to see how well you would gel into a team. Oh but having relevant exp, hobbies outside of work and being a special person helps.
> But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from
> SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any
> less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing?
> Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience
> in education?
Being someone who went to do A-levels. Somehow it hasn't prepared me as well for uni. Those that went to college got hands on experience on some coding whilst those at alevel merely did more the theory based stuff. Its the alevels ad other grades from your high school years that determines partially where you go in uni. Its a sad story that many people would prefer those who went to well established unis rather then those who went to newer unis. When in fact the newer unis do just as well in most cases or even better as they teach more modern ideas or even provide additional on the side subjects like business or social factors to your work. I have to admit, going to uni was great. i've learnt a good amount of coding, its taught me the importance of working in a team and communicating, put me into the correct mentality for any IT based jobs, the various basic methods of developing software and also making me very organised. Hell by the end of the 3rd year i was handing assignments early rather then on deadlines.
But lets not forget, having work exp (espeically relevant ones) is every bit as important. To neglect this side is to spell disaster.
Now i must pray that i've got my job. I really do want this job.
pb wrote:
> Employers will always ask you what qualification you have,
> partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at
> something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills
> any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
I thought exactly the same thing, so I ignored the fact that I had twice as many GCSEs than I needed for a vocational course, and went off to college to do one anyway. Unfortunately they seem much the same as academic courses, where your graded on what you know and not what you can do, with an annoying amount of common sense c**p thrown in.
> But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from
> SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any
> less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing?
> Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience
> in education?
The grades are important for progression. Good results in SATS mean you are entered for higher tier papers in GCSEs, good GCSEs results only available via higher tiers enable you to study more academic type a-levels, academic type a-levels are favoured on the popular degree courses. So they do all contribute to the educational path.
From my personal experience work skills seem to revolve around one principal; knowing your place and therefore keeping your mouth shut. There's no way to teach that to naive youngsters, as it has to be found out first hand, and therefore doing so would be counterproductive. Plus work experience in education is a joke because you are never given real responsibility, or money, meaning it is not a true reflection of the work world and next to no experience can be drawn from it.
> Employers will always ask you what qualification you have,
> partly because it tells them that you actually stuck at
> something and learnt while you were there, but are these skills
> any better than, say, some manual skill or even life skills?
I thought exactly the same thing, so I ignored the fact that I had twice as many GCSEs than I needed for a vocational course, and went off to college to do one anyway. Unfortunately they seem much the same as academic courses, where your graded on what you know and not what you can do, with an annoying amount of common sense c**p thrown in.
> But even before Uni, you’re given grades at every level, from
> SATS and GCSEs to A-levels and their equivalent. Are these any
> less of an achievement or do they all amount to the same thing?
> Should there be classes in work skills and more work experience
> in education?
The grades are important for progression. Good results in SATS mean you are entered for higher tier papers in GCSEs, good GCSEs results only available via higher tiers enable you to study more academic type a-levels, academic type a-levels are favoured on the popular degree courses. So they do all contribute to the educational path.
From my personal experience work skills seem to revolve around one principal; knowing your place and therefore keeping your mouth shut. There's no way to teach that to naive youngsters, as it has to be found out first hand, and therefore doing so would be counterproductive. Plus work experience in education is a joke because you are never given real responsibility, or money, meaning it is not a true reflection of the work world and next to no experience can be drawn from it.
I think the tide is turning with regards to this. I didnt finish my Uni course and Im in a full time job that pays well, has a future etc where some of the skills I learned come in very handy.
My Uni friends who have just graduated havent a job betweem them because theu keep getting turned down because they have a huge gap on their CV under previous employment as they didnt work through Uni, whereas I did even when I was there.
Makes you wonder a bit.
My Uni friends who have just graduated havent a job betweem them because theu keep getting turned down because they have a huge gap on their CV under previous employment as they didnt work through Uni, whereas I did even when I was there.
Makes you wonder a bit.
trish wrote:
> I think the tide is turning with regards to this.
I'd like to think so but I'm not too optimistic, as I think it's more along the lines of who you already know at a company, that determines whether or not you are given a job.
That's my experience anyway
> I think the tide is turning with regards to this.
I'd like to think so but I'm not too optimistic, as I think it's more along the lines of who you already know at a company, that determines whether or not you are given a job.
That's my experience anyway
FantasyMeister wrote:
> And here's a tip: We never used to ask questions like "So
> what was your thesis about?" to check level of
> intelligence, we'd ask questions like "So what do you think
> of the current situation in Darfur?" or "If money were
> no object how would you tackle global warming?" or
> "What are your views on Iraq?" to see how intelligence
> was put to use.
I don't really agree with this.
Not everyone is interested in or cares very much about politics, but that doesn't mean they're not intelligent. Plus, if the person you're asking has say, a...Politics degree, you probably ARE asking them what their thesis was about, and they'll obviously be able to provide a much more informed and interesting point of view than the average person.
this just sounds like elitist snobbery.
"to see how intelligence was put to use"
there are plenty of other indicators of "useful" intelligence besides politics.
> And here's a tip: We never used to ask questions like "So
> what was your thesis about?" to check level of
> intelligence, we'd ask questions like "So what do you think
> of the current situation in Darfur?" or "If money were
> no object how would you tackle global warming?" or
> "What are your views on Iraq?" to see how intelligence
> was put to use.
I don't really agree with this.
Not everyone is interested in or cares very much about politics, but that doesn't mean they're not intelligent. Plus, if the person you're asking has say, a...Politics degree, you probably ARE asking them what their thesis was about, and they'll obviously be able to provide a much more informed and interesting point of view than the average person.
this just sounds like elitist snobbery.
"to see how intelligence was put to use"
there are plenty of other indicators of "useful" intelligence besides politics.
Page: