By Nerijus Cerniauskas
Currently there is a student movement within University of Birmingham which believes that the University is not preparing graduates to meet the demands existent in the labour market. There is a belief that University is not doing enough to enhance employability and that businesses constantly complain that students possess either irrelevant or out-dated skills and techniques. These statements are more relevant in the social sciences, where courses are largely theory based. The question is, are the students right to complain? But first we need to answer why so many students are getting further education.
Paul Mason in a lecture on the 3rd of March showed that a new class: a large population with bachelor’s degrees is being created, and their futures are uncertain. To an extent, he is right. Table 1 shows how the percentage of UK residents acquiring further education which is clearly increasing since early 20th century. Historically, academia was not consumed in such large quantities and there are two main causes for change: economical and sociological.
Number of students enrolled in full-time tertiary education (FTTE) versus total UK population in selective years (in thousands)
| 1900/10[1] | 1925/35 | 1962/63 | 1972/73 | 1997/98 | 2009/10 | |
| FTTE | 25 | 50 | 216 | 453 | 1.200 | 1.632 |
| Population | 3.570 | 3.910 | 5.350 | 5.610 | 5.840 | 6.180 |
| Percent | 0,70% | 1,28% | 4,04% | 8,07% | 20,55% | 26,41% |
Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency since 2001, National Statistics
As the majority of the population was poor, only relatively few could afford the luxury of getting a higher education. As the standard of living rose, however, people were able to set some income aside and invest into further education. Most states also saw education as a positive good (both to the individual and to the public at large) and created many incentives to lure people into further education. What is interesting is that while the number of students rose, education was still heavily subsidised by the British state and student s continued to come.
The sociological aspect is that a university degree has historically been seen as evidence of achievement that is superior to any simple job an 18 year old could get. Three years of University were valued higher than three years of customer service in a local shop, for example. There are two reasons for this also.
The first is that University added value to an individual’s self-development. An individual was able to work on his own, find information, critically analyse information, read widely, and create a network of like-minded individuals. The second is that a University merely gives a piece of paper which shows that a student has passed a course and this paper on its own is a sign to the worker that a student is an exceptional one.
The shop assistant, on the other hand, was not able to advance himself in such a broad way, but was more stuck with day to day duties. Unless the shop was famous in the area, it was unlikely to be recognized by other employers either.
Now, however, employers have increased in size and technologies have changed. It has become much easier to verify the quality of an individual based on an interview (phone, internet), face-to-face meetings, taking short training courses or try-outs. Thus in theory, the second aspect which Universities had in the past should not be as important as the first.
As before, there are two ways to do this: the academia way which is broad, theory based progression, or the shop way, which are more hands on, direct, specific techniques. What is certain is that both can learn a bit from the other. What is not certain, is if a University can do both as effectively. There are also two clear reasons for this.
Firstly, for academia to progress, questions need to be constantly asked, issues raised, data analysed, and solutions formulated. In business, an individual is more likely to first follow orders: put that there, calculate this and unlikely to question much the orders given. Second, in business the work hours are very clearly defined and all rules are very strict: work starts at 8 and finishes at 17, customers must be respected above all else. University, on the other hand, is more lenient. This way, University gives a chance to experiment, to learn time management, to advance one’s self in his/her own manner. In this sense, University is as much a transition from school, where all answers are given, to a world where a person has to do most of the work on his own. Funnily enough, this “liberty” is not what people seem to want.
Second, each business has its unique formula to peruse a given agenda. Even companies of similar types use different software, organizational techniques, have different budgets, and use different technologies and so on. Because of this, if a concrete skill is learned in a university, it is unlikely to be effectively adapted to any given business. A person is then left between two choices: either memorize or acquaint one’s self with all the techniques (think of reading a 1000 page book of quantities methods and having an exam on it) or learning some general ideas, which could then be adapted to meet the needs of large employers.
Another aspect is to see what student enrolled in tertiary education on the whole want: to advance academically or enter the job market without further studies and degrees. Table 2 indicates the proportion of those enrolled in tertiary education who aims for further academic versus those who seek immediate employment. The vast majority seem to want a more academic approach prior to getting employed. If this statistic is accurate, most tertiary studies are aimed at academic improvement, which seems to fit with the demands of the population.
Percent of those enrolled in Tertiary education who seek further academic progress versus those, seeking to enter the job market
| Column1 | 2008 | 2003 | 1998 |
| Academic | 77% | 66% | 69% |
| Occupation | 23% | 34% | 31% |
Source: Eurostat
On one hand, it must be remembered that University is already trying to merge the two to a degree: industrial placements, a large choice of modules, long vacations (which can be used for short term, hands on projects). On the other, it is questionable whether too much specific training is a job of a university. Of course, any business would want the University to do most of the training for them, so they could happily reduce their costs. But the reality is, that academia is not a simple training camp, which only seeks high graduate – hiring ratio.
What is more interesting, then, is whether a new market will be forming for people who finish school, but will understand that academia is not necessarily the way to go. If an individual want mainly get a quality job and skip that abstract self-development, flexibility nonsense, a person should then be able to start at a small shop but after a bit longer, perhaps 4-5 years, be able to get a similar job to that of a university graduate. Also, maybe courses which focus very heavily on job specific roles will become more available. Furthermore, there is no reason why one cannot turn to academia at a later time.
Either way, as yet there is no evidence that future prospects are negative for those with degrees as proposed by Paul Mason. Nor is it very likely that Universities will become training grounds for jobs. However, the strength of Universities lies in its flexibility, freedom, a large potential source of self-development. If one can already do this or believes that he does not need this, why go to a university?
References:
Jefferies J. (2005) ‘The UK population: past, present and future’ in National Statistics Online Focus on People and Migration: 2005 Available on www.statistics.gov.uk . Accessed on March 6, 2011
Databases:
UK National Statistics (www.statistics.gov.uk)
Higher Education Statistics Agency (www.hesa.ac.uk)
No comments:
Post a Comment