Stop ‘Rip-Off’ University Degrees | Good Morning Britain 

Amen

Yeah, all happening under the tories, a totally woeful 'govt'.

Disagree they won’t be a rip off to the student but they will be a rip off to the taxpayer.

Well that’s another thing…. University tuition fee should be much lower to start with. Where all this money is going ?

@@agneskrzy803wealthy people’s bank accounts, silly

Another 7 years after that, what hourly pay?

Medicine is a 5 Yr course

Are you a junior doc ?

​@@bigtombowski£36.75 an hour. Average of £86k a year

I guess the two years of Foundation Programme training are being included: 5 plus 2 years

What do you want to eat? Says wife. "All I am saying is that I need a soft palatable meal that is tasty and satisfying" but what!? " I'm answering your question, we should find something I can consume so I can be satisfied" give me an example of what you want to eat!? "Your asking the wrong question...."

If i were to invest say ................... £36K in four year degree £40K in living expenses £80K income foregone in a minimum wage job .......................... I'd want a realistic chance to earn way above the national average income. What do you think?

@@gosskamperis2016 so the government wants to push high earner jobs that benefit the return. By enabling a job scheme vocational or caps on women studies in comparison to a stem field.

Work takes up a third of one's life. To embrace life fully : Work can be enjoyable, as well as earning a living . That is why I am still working as a Carpenter over the last 60 + years...

@@woodenseagull1899 I agree. I've always loved my job. As a non-graduate, I'm an anomaly in my profession but I wiped the floor with many who were graduates.

The government announcement page explains that it is also concern for society as a whole, whose resources are wasted on education that is not worthwhile. It's not just students who are 'ripped off'. It is also society that is ripped off when students do these courses.

@@cinnamondonkey2397 Why shouldn't they 'game the system'? It's manifestly unfair. And why are you so concerned about students failing to pay back a few grand, when there are wealthy tax avoiders who owe billions to the UK treasury?! The student loan system is purely ideological, it's got nothing to do with cost effectiveness; you do realise that the UK tax payer now pays MORE to fund university education than when it was 'free' - and will continure to do so for a very long time!

That's a big part of it, yes.

@@trockfield4593 They shouldn't game the system because they are exploiting the generosity of society as a whole -- everyone else. We pay through taxes or through getting less in the way of public services when someone takes without doing their fair share of the work needed for our society.

Couldn't have agreed more with this

Excellence. A career politician dictating what's valuable to the general public.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

But he went to Oxford though.

So would you prefer a PM with a GSCE in metal work?

​@@paulfitzpatrick3090maybe a degree in Ethics would be good.

And the history degree obtained by Jacob Rees -Mogg - 'useless' degrees by the Prime Ministers reckoning. Eton may come into it? Mr Halton repeating the nonsense that a university education is about 'getting a good well paid job' and not education makes him patently unfit for this position.

@@paulfitzpatrick3090 Might help him understand trade and industry.

Yes lol

How dare you be sceptical. 😂😂😂😂

Plenty of data is already available

Students, if they are sensible, already use the published data to evaluate courses. Researchers have also done it. We know there are courses that are not worth doing and the reasons are easily understood. Usually it is because they teach frivolous content (e.g. fine art) and admit students with low ability onto the course.

@@matthewleitch1 Then they came for the Actors And I did not speak out Because I am not an Actor (Shhhhh!) "Degenerate art (German: Entartete Kunst) was a term adopted in the 1920s by the Nazi Party in Germany to describe modern art. During the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler, German modernist art, including many works of internationally renowned artists, was removed from state-owned museums and banned in Nazi Germany on the grounds that such art was an "insult to German feeling", un-German, Freemasonic, Jewish, or Communist in nature. Those identified as degenerate artists were subjected to sanctions that included being dismissed from teaching positions, being forbidden to exhibit or to sell their art, and in some cases being forbidden to produce art."

Define 'rip-off'?

@@lvega5606 Yep - similar story here (Russell Group universities versus the rest).

@@trockfield4593 Anyone who is unemployed or on the minimum wage in the 5 years after graduation - rip off

@@leestalker8256 Interesting that the education minister himself couldn't answer the question of which courses the government would target as 'rip-off' degrees. Nor could he define a 'good job'. The reason for that is that he knows that there is no genuine policy intent here - it's performative politics.

Definitely bring back Polytechnic to many universities, also making sure students get help with letters and CV's with interview skills.

5:54

But maybe if you'd done a university degree and learned how to think critically, you might have been better equipped to make a relevant contribution to this discussion?

One of the first things I learned in kindergarden was that contributing rudeness to any discussion only ever leads to bad outcomes.

What about being an MP? You don't need a degree to be an MP but many members do? This whole 'you must have a job that matches your degree' narrative is so limiting.

@@theosmith5704 well ideally you get a job that requires you to have a degree (so that means the job doesn’t have to be related to the degree you studied) or you are doing a skilled job. If you go to uni, there is no reason you should be getting a job that anyone can apply for, even without a degree

It's an absurd logic given that even jobs not requiring degrees for their execution now state a degree as a condition to apply and be considered. That's the thing called degree inflation: when there's an over-supply of graduates on the market, employers feel entitled to demand university qualifications even for jobs where they would not be required.

😂😂😂

Here 5:53

You're totally right, individuals should be disappointed if they end up working in a shop because they could have taken that job 3 years earlier without needing a degree and wasting lots of money. Of course, if they are working their way into management etc that's fair enough as they might reach a ceiling without a degree.

Nursing is a STEM subject. Most of the valued teachers teach STEM. People who do conservation need to understand the science involved. It's STEM again.

The Conservative government doesn't want people (especially working class people) to be critical or independent thinkers - that's the whole point of the exercise.

@@trockfield4593 No. That's not the point of limiting low value degrees. If it was then the strategy to follow would be to limit high quality, typically STEM teaching. High quality, typically STEM degrees teach critical, independent thinking, usually better than low quality, history/languages/art degrees. If you get some history wrong you can still write your book and very likely you will never even know you were wrong. If you get some engineering wrong then the machine/system does not work. You know you are wrong. This is a major reason why sound thinking is more important in STEM than most other subjects.

@@matthewleitch1 'Sound thinking' is not the same as critical thinking.

@@trockfield4593 Sound thinking, sound reasoning, reason, critical thinking, effective thinking -- all more or less the same thing: being able to reason without mistakes and spot mistakes and tricks when you see them. At least, that's how I am using the phrase. Maths vs fine art; which teaches sound thinking best? It is mathematics. A fine art course will involve some fine art history, criticism, and maybe doing some fine art. None of these requires reliable, correct thinking or the detection of errors in thinking.

I was waiting for him to get out his Mallet and start bonking the presenters on the head for asking the wrong questions

​@dirpitz6157 oh God! Timmy 🎉 brings back memories

The government web page on this explains that it is both students and society who are being 'ripped off'. Some students are part of the problem because they choose low value degrees for the lifestyle and to put off having to work, knowing full well what they are doing.

Yes. The drop out rate strongly reflects the quality of the students who start the course.

not really. I dropped out because of how much of a scam university is.... I studied business. I thought I’m gonna learn how to run business, how businesses operate, how to do accounting etc... and I’m gonna be given lectures by atleast 2 big CEO’s a year. but no. Nothing! They teach absolutely nothing! and the teachers don’t give a shit about the students. if you ask them for help, they get all salty and shit.

Very cringy indeed

The problem is that they aren't telling you what course is a joke because they don't have a clue. Sorry to be rude, I find ironic you couldn't see the pure corruption. Maybe your afraid of labelling people

What were your degrees in?

Biotechnology for me and Geophysics for hubby. Both STEM courses.

Exactly. They're causing trouble. He was clear.

Any capitalist society is essentially a pyramid scheme lol.

LOL It is sadly a spot on joke

Your answer is as murky as his. Are you pointing to a disadvantaged class or defending degrees that hold no societal value?

@@WarshMeh I am pointing to the fact it sounds like the intention is to make higher education restricted to the "elite". Compare the entry requirements for Chemistry at University of Manchester and Manchester Metropolitan University. By having lower entry requirements, MMU is able to give people a chance to improve their life whom could not possibly do so through UoM. However, I imagine the rates of graduates in the elite jobs is lower for MMU graduates than UoM graduates. Therefore MMU Chemistry could be seen as a less worthwhile course according to the minister in the interview, opening the door to further restrict entry to the course. Tighter restrictions often mean a higher barrier to entry, restricting further education to the "elite" that managed to do well at A-level. If that was the case, my 2Cs and a D at A-level wouldn't have given me the second chance at MMU where I qualified with a 1st class Mchem.

Exactly - this isn't about actually getting rid of useless degrees. Do we think pointless subjects like theology or classics at Oxbridge are on the cutting board? No, because rich people do those. What he's talking about is stopping poor and disadvantaged people from having access to subjects that don't create wealth for people of his social class. The Conservatives see the only reason to educate the lower classes as being to provide them with higher level employees for they and their chum's companies and to generate wealth for them. Tarquin Montgomery IV can spend 3 years learning about Ancient Greece and Rome, but if Dave Jenkins wants to go to university it better be to learn how to make better drones for Tarquin's daddy's arms company. This is social engineering - designed to keep poor people in their place by emphasising that if the upper classes deign to allow them to be educated, they have to justify it by how much money they're going to generate for the capitalist class.

Blah blah blah “disadvantaged“ blah blah blah. Look HE is for the elite, the intellectual elite. What’s the point of a degree if everyone can get one, A levels have practically got to that point now. It doesn’t matter what background you come from if you’re intelligent enough you can go to Oxbridge so let’s not dumb down degrees any more.

@@glynmellor6161 of course oxbridge is full of Rick people because they go to the best schools. The point I was trying to make is that if you are intelligent enough you are still able to go rich or poor.

I thought these degree mills were only to be found in the US. It's sad to hear they exist in the UK as well. If someone with a degree from one of these places applies for a job at the firm I work at, they're not going to get a second look. It's likely not going to make it through the CV filtering system.

Because most of those jobs that could be taught through an apprenticeship instead require a degree. More and more jobs require a degree for simple entry level jobs.

Unis already have stats on where and what jobs graduates get u cretin

it's the weekly Sunak soundbite designed to stir up division. Halton's clueless, incoherent defence of it merely confirms that if your 'useless' degree in say Classics or History is from Oxford after Eton - this is more likely to have a good 'outcome' than if you went to a comprehensive and studied at Stoke.

"useless degree courses in universities right now. Most of which lie in the Humanities." What is wrong with people in this country? I'm a business graduate, but why are humanities "useless"? I assume you don't read, listen to music, or go to museum, cinemas or theatres....

If you think about this for more than 5 seconds, it's obvious that it is far from 'straight forward'. What is straight forward, however, is that this government wants to limit the aspirations of working class kids by restricting their tertiary education choices to 'skills-based' qualifications. 'Useless' degrees - such as Classics - will be the sole prerogative of elite university candidates with public school backgrounds.

The two most important reasons are (1) teaching content that is not very useful -- the sort of thing people should really just do as a hobby, such as fine art, history, English literature, and (2) accepting students whose ability is low, and who are more likely to drop out, get a poor result if they reach the end, and then struggle to find employment. Those are the big ones.

Society supports people in higher education for more than just their entertainment. It is so that they can do more to help others as adults. Doing this can also lead them to be interested, excited, and able to view the world in new and better ways. Art, philosophy, and history are lower value because they don't do much to make people more helpful to their fellow citizens. Our most basic needs are for food, water, shelter, healthcare, transport, and education. The need for artists, philosophers, and historians is very small indeed and the market is over-supplied.

@@matthewleitch1 Holy cats, I can usually find something in people's replies to work with- not necessarily agreeing but at least reaching towards. Art, philosophy and the study of history exist only to help people and society. The notion that securing our material needs is our only purpose is to reduce humanity to insects. Everything we see around us, everything we know and understand, is derived from science and art, and most scientists (not all, admittedly, but most) would tell you the two are equally important. Some folks like to think that money is the foundation of society. However money, cash, the economy, are more ephemeral as any painting or philosophical musing, and at least these creative endeavours make us who we are. As opposed to money, which is just a shadowy idea, something we supposedly "earn" doing stuff we mostly hate to buy things we could just share between ourselves anyway. As cultures which valued their people first once used to do.

@@alanhindle3149 Humans are not reduced to insects. This is just common sense. It's about priorities. We don't need as many artists, philosophers, and historians as universities are producing. They are also not as important, as helpers to others, as those who provide for more pressing needs. One of the reasons we have too many people being taught stuff that's not really very important at universities is simply that we have a large body of people who are university instructors for these subjects. They don't want to be unemployed or lose status and income, so they argue against this kind of reform. They generate reasons why they are important, valuable people. Another reason is that some people struggle with maths at school. If this is serious enough they will find they are blocked from studying A levels (in the UK) that would enable them to enter interesting, mind expanding, valuable degree courses later. They must choose from what is left and make the best of it. The last thing they want is to hear that the courses they have selected are not as valuable as courses available to people who were better at maths when they were kids. It's tough and I think some things can be done to help more people with maths so that more have a free choice at school and later. Put it another way, if maths was not hard then the enrollment for many 'arts' subjects would be a lot lower.

@@matthewleitch1 You seem to be under the impression that when you leave art school you're qualified only to be an "artist" making pretty pictures. Art school teaches you to think creatively. A philosophy course teaches you to reason. A history course teaches you not only the past but to understand and prepare for the future. We will always need to think creatively, with reason, with hindsight and prescience. Also, I'm being remiss in not mentioning English Literature (and other languages), which teaches us to communicate, Theatre studies- the original artform from which every other field of knowledge sprang- sociology, anthropology, cultural studies... What we don't need so much are economists. I'll give you that.

@@matthewleitch1 As for maths, I wonder if many physicists today would say that, sure, math is vital, but more so is creativity, curiosity, reason and the ability to make leaps in the imagination. Maths will never become less hard, we simply more and better supported teachers with resources and time to help kids take it all in. Though frankly, if a child's virtuosity is in dancing rather than algebra, it is a double loss to force the issue.

Basically just trying to get rid of the arts…

Exactly

Working in a shop isn't useless because it's valuable work experience. If you ran a shop and you had to choose between hiring someone who already had 3 years of experience working in a shop, or someone who had a 3 year history degree, who do you think most people would rather hire? And I shouldn't need to mention that the person who has been working has been earning money and building savings whereas the person who studied history is in tens of thousands of pounds in debt.

@@FeathersMcGraw_ She is calling out the minster for implying that working in shop is worthless. I don’t think she actually thinks working in a shop is worthless. I don’t think working in a shop worthless.

@@tomunderwood5996 I believe the minister agrees with me: that it's the degree that is useless, not the work.

@@FeathersMcGraw_Oh ok. Fair enough. I guess I missed your point.

If you had spent 3 years working and saving money instead of going into tens of thousands of pounds of debt at uni, how much better off would you be right now?

My degree was worth every penny. When I do work (self employed that is and not full time as I do have small children not yet in school) I have skills that I believe only university could have taught me. I don’t think if I’d continued working my job prior to attending university I’d be any “richer”.

You highlighted something essential here: studying and paying for a university degree isn't worth it in a low wage economy like the UK. The median (not average) full time wage is around 33k pounds a year, which might not seem bad but is far from enough to live comfortably while repaying the debt incurred to fund university studies. Now that's for full time earners. Imagine the fate of those working part time or zero hours contracts after completing university.

But universities were never intended to equip people purely for the job market!

Do you think that young women who intend to have babies should stay away from university?