University education, breadth or depth, today's IT

[ibis]

2 - Their basic knowledge of basic English form, puncutation etc is very limited which causes a lot of problems.

Sic. Sorry.

[Dublinguy]

2 - Their basic knowledge of basic English form, puncutation etc is very limited which causes a lot of problems.

Sic. Sorry.

Ibis - I never claimed to be a typist though

[riven]

The reality is that an Undergraduate degree today is hardly worth the paper it's printed on from an employer’s point of view if they are looking for expertise.

I would suggest that engineering is worth the paper it is written on.

The problem with colleges is there is too much emphasis on emans rather than real world. As an engineer, I think that engineers should be builting bridges ala brunell or at least in that mold. Instead all the engineering courses award 50%+ of their marks for exams with many going higher. People need to be able to apply what they are learning before they get out of college and this do not happen in Ireland.

As regards the whole US stlye system. It takes maybe 3 years to get a basic understanding of engineering (whether it be chemical mechanical electronic) and the first year is used for basics in other sciences. There would not be time to do a two year broad scope module. With the US system, unless you are the cream if the crop, it is very very easy to end up learning a lot of stuff but nothing real. In college just as in your career you need focus.

[Dublinguy]

The problem with graduates is that -

1 - For some reason they seem to think they know everything and should be paid a fortune for it cause they got a 2.1 or whatever
2 - Their basic knowledge of basic English form, puncutation etc is very limited which causes a lot of problems.

Fees should definitely be brought back and the sooner the better - it is the only method of improving the quality of our graduates and courses.

There should be a definite changing in the dispertion of results, A first should mean you are in the top 5/6% of your course....otherwise it means nothing....

Geraghd

Obviously the quality of the student has to be taken into account but what you will find is that very quickly people will know whether a result from a particular university is worthwhile or not....ie if poor students are getting firsts from a particular college then this college results won't be valued highly....
Yeah but that means it would be harder to get a 1st in some colleges (with excellent students) than others (with poor students) which doesnt really make sense. Results should only be rewarded on the basis of merit and ability.

[odie1kanobe]

2 - Their basic knowledge of basic English form, puncutation etc is very limited which causes a lot of problems.

Sic. Sorry.

I have seen it before but what does Sic mean ?

[geraghd]

The problem with graduates is that -

1 - For some reason they seem to think they know everything and should be paid a fortune for it cause they got a 2.1 or whatever
2 - Their basic knowledge of basic English form, puncutation etc is very limited which causes a lot of problems.

Fees should definitely be brought back and the sooner the better - it is the only method of improving the quality of our graduates and courses.

There should be a definite changing in the dispertion of results, A first should mean you are in the top 5/6% of your course....otherwise it means nothing....

Geraghd

Obviously the quality of the student has to be taken into account but what you will find is that very quickly people will know whether a result from a particular university is worthwhile or not....ie if poor students are getting firsts from a particular college then this college results won't be valued highly....

But that would be the case now where there is no say normal distribution of grades in every course so that only a certain percentage of students get a 1st or 3rd etc. If 20% of the students get a 1st and they are poor students as you say, people could find out if a 1st is worth all that much from that particular college as much as they would as you say if there was a definite distribution of grades..

[Dublinguy]

Geraghd

What I mean is that at the moment far more people receive 1st's/2:1's etc than is really the case....it doesn't distinguish the top people from the poorer quality...

Top 5/6% in a course receive a first
Next 10/15% receive a 2:1
Nest 20/25 receive a 2:2

[geraghd]

Geraghd

What I mean is that at the moment far more people receive 1st's/2:1's etc than is really the case....it doesn't distinguish the top people from the poorer quality...

Top 5/6% in a course receive a first
Next 10/15% receive a 2:1
Nest 20/25 receive a 2:2

Well what you mean then is to have a distribution across all graduates rather than for each college.

Right now something like 90% of graduates attending Oxford/Cambridge get a first or 2.1 which is far above the average. I doubt this is down to dumbing down of course material within the university but rather the higher calibre of students going into the university in the first place.
Enforcing a distribution on per university basis would mean it would be exceptionally hard to get a first in Oxbridge and exceptionally easy in a place like say the University of West England. (no offence to anybody who went to UWE..)