# The Perversion of Scholarship



## Dr Jon (Aug 2, 2012)

I just spotted this, which describes how university "education" has been dumbed down.
The independent pursuit of knowledge has been replaced by a culture of conformity and intolerance. I know this is in the USA, but I was recently horrified to see that my local college's unique selling point is now that it's a darts academy, ffs.

Never mind science, technology and engineering, we can play darts.

Jesus - what a fucking country...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 2, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> I just spotted this, which describes how university "education" has been dumbed down.
> The independent pursuit of knowledge has been replaced by a culture of conformity and intolerance. I know this is in the USA, but I was recently horrified to see that my local college's unique selling point is now that it's a darts academy, ffs.
> 
> Never mind science, technology and engineering, we can play darts.
> ...


my alma mater's most famous selling point is its brazen display of a corpse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 3, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> my alma mater's most famous selling point is its brazen display of a corpse.


 
TBF, Jezza does look good for someone who's been dead for so long.


----------



## Skimix (Aug 3, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> darts academy


 
Is it April 1st? 

Seriously though that is absolutely unbelievable...what are they thinking!?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 3, 2012)

Skimix said:


> Is it April 1st?
> 
> Seriously though that is absolutely unbelievable...what are they thinking!?


More like, what are they drinking.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 3, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> More like, what are they drinking.


Probably Robinson's.
With pubs closing all over the country, darts is likely now classed as cultural archaeology or something.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> my alma mater's most famous selling point is its brazen display of a corpse.


Really?

Whose?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

There was an article in the latest Professional Engineering magazine from the IMechE that a significant number of engineering undergraduates are accepted without having maths at A level (or equivalent). For Engineering!!!

I was pretty horrified about that.


----------



## Greebo (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Really?
> 
> Whose?


Jeremy Bentham
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Bentham-Project/who/autoicon


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 4, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> I just spotted this, which describes how university "education" has been dumbed down.
> The independent pursuit of knowledge has been replaced by a culture of conformity and intolerance. I know this is in the USA, but I was recently horrified to see that my local college's unique selling point is now that it's a darts academy, ffs.
> 
> Never mind science, technology and engineering, we can play darts.
> ...


"The independent pursuit of knowledge"? At a university?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Jeremy Bentham
> http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Bentham-Project/who/autoicon


Gosh.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> "The independent pursuit of knowledge"? At a university?


Depends what you both interpret 'independent' to mean.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Depends what you both interpret 'independent' to mean.


Not to a set course.


----------



## Greebo (Aug 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> "The independent pursuit of knowledge"? At a university?


It was easier when there were grants and no tuition fees.  Okay you still had to complete certain amount of defined coursework before fixed deadlines, but after that it was up to each student to choose how they wanted to use the available resources.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Really?
> 
> Whose?


One j. bentham.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There was an article in the latest Professional Engineering magazine from the IMechE that a significant number of engineering undergraduates are accepted without having maths at A level (or equivalent). For Engineering!!!
> 
> I was pretty horrified about that.


Is that without following the course at all or having done an AS level maybe? I think my sister finished the course but only 'accepted' the AS level grade and managed a reasonable 2:2  in Engineering. A levels have changed since I did them, I don't get all this accepting or not accepting a grade thingie.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Not to a set course.


Well students do chose their own courses to a certain amount and in some subjects the compulsory courses are minimum. Others such as engineering offer less choice because of the accreditation requirements from professional institutions. But all uni courses will require a certain amount of independent study else the student won't pass.

At postgrad level independent study is how it is - nobody teaches you much for a PhD, you're expected to figure it all out for yourself. Masters students are expected to do an independent project at least as well as the courses offered, but there will still be choices.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Is that without following the course at all or having done an AS level maybe? I think my sister finished the course but only 'accepted' the AS level grade and managed a reasonable 2:2 in Engineering. A levels have changed since I did them, I don't get all this accepting or not accepting a grade thingie.


Hold on, I'll get the article.

Article has the following - it's based on a House of Lords science and technology committee report:


> *Figures reveal that 20% of engineering course entrants in 2009 had not studied maths past GCSE level*. The report urged universities to toughen up on their maths entrance requirements for science & maths-based degrees. A number of university vice-chancellors told the committee that their institutions are being forced to offer remedial maths classes for those who have not studied the subject at A-level - and even for those that have.


 
Certainly when I did A levels there was no choice in whether or not you accepted a grade!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Well students do chose their own courses to a certain amount and in some subjects the compulsory courses are minimum. Others such as engineering offer less choice because of the accreditation requirements from professional institutions. But all uni courses will require a certain amount of independent study else the student won't pass.
> 
> At postgrad level independent study is how it is - nobody teaches you much for a PhD, you're expected to figure it all out for yourself. Masters students are expected to do an independent project at least as well as the courses offered, but there will still be choices.


I don't mean independent as in _on your own _but as in totally free to follow where your research/reading/thought takes you.That might apply at Phd level, but what % of students are doing Phds?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> One j. bentham.


It's a bit weird, having your corpse on display.

Weirder with the head at his feet though...


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I don't mean independent as in _on your own _but as in totally free to follow where your research/reading/thought takes you.That might apply at Phd level, but what % of students are doing Phds?


 
From the 2010/2011 figures available from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) 
http://www.hesa.ac.uk/content/view/1897/239/

Approximately 380,000 people graduated with a first degree last year and 20,000 graduated with a PhD, which would be about 5.3%.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> From the 2010/2011 figures available from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA)
> http://www.hesa.ac.uk/content/view/1897/239/
> 
> Approximately 380,000 people graduated with a first degree last year and 20,000 graduated with a PhD, which would be about 5.3%.


You're not correct: the question's not 'what proportion of people graduated last year with a phd' but 'what proportion go on to a research degree', which would mean looking at the number of students in the year last year's phds started. Of the people who got a ba/bsc last year, there was an additional number who will have dropped out & not graduated. So I reckon it's nearer 4% of people who start a degree go on to complete a phd


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> You're not correct: the question's not 'whay proportion of people graduated last year with a phd' but 'what proportion go on to a research degree', which would mean looking at the number of students in the year last year's phds started. Of the people who got a ba/bsc last year, there was an tadditional number who will have dropped out & not graduated. So I reckon it's nearer 4% of people who start a degree go on to complete a phd


Well, butchers asked 'what % of people do a PhD?' not 'what % of people go on to do a research degree'. Also those were the only figures I could get from HESA for free. I reckon 5% is a reasonable figure, I don't think it would drop to 4%, there's some 'non-completion' at PhD level but not enough to force a drop from 5.3 to 4%.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 4, 2012)

...


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

I've been having a look for some more figures, but it's a bit unclear overall - there was a massive jump in the number of students due to the fees increase, and HESA seem to change the data collection rules every two-three years so they're no longer collecting data about writing-up students. 

If I go back to the data from 3 and 4 years previously (335,000 and 334,000 students respectively) there's been a hike of 10% in the numbers of graduating students, give or take.

It's not reported how long a student takes to get a PhD, so if either of the above figures are used the result is 6% of students go on to get a PhD.

This discussion on the same topic has more figures but some of the links are broken now:
http://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=41590.0


----------



## Lo Siento. (Aug 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I don't mean independent as in _on your own _but as in totally free to follow where your research/reading/thought takes you.That might apply at Phd level, but what % of students are doing Phds?


doesn't apply at PhD level either. You're fairly regularly peer reviewed, and academic criteria can determine the form quite easily, even if you have a degree of freedom with the content.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Well, butchers asked 'what % of people do a PhD?' not 'what % of people go on to do a research degree'. Also those were the only figures I could get from HESA for free. I reckon 5% is a reasonable figure, I don't think it would drop to 4%, there's some 'non-completion' at PhD level but not enough to force a drop from 5.3 to 4%.


Anecdotally that would surprise me. I'm the only one I know of from my BA cohort (of 150 or so) doing a PhD, and we were one of the uni's strongest departments.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

Lo Siento. said:


> Anecdotally that would surprise me. I'm the only one I know of from my BA cohort (of 150 or so) doing a PhD, and we were one of the uni's strongest departments.


It's very subject dependent, and due to the lack of funding in the arts and humanities it's very low indeed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 4, 2012)

Also a lot of phd students will be overseas students, who I suppose should be omitted from the statistics


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There was an article in the latest Professional Engineering magazine from the IMechE that a significant number of engineering undergraduates are accepted without having maths at A level (or equivalent). For Engineering!!!
> 
> I was pretty horrified about that.


Oi!


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> Oi!


Not you - The article was talking about school leavers going straight to uni.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> It's very subject dependent, and due to the lack of funding in the arts and humanities it's very low indeed.


yeah, although there does seem to be enough to give a lot of it out to people studying stuff that is utterly trivial  

And obviously doing it without funding implies either a massive amount of commitment or significant financial backing (between saving and doing masters, then saving and working during PhD, it will have taken me essentially a decade between deciding I wanted to do and and actually completing it)


----------



## smmudge (Aug 4, 2012)

TBH having just completed an undergrad degree it doesn't really tie in with my experience.  For all of my essays we were given a broad title or vague question allowing for many different angles of interpretation. I ended up using very little of the 'taught' materials really, and relied instead on whatever I could find in research - so the limit was only what I was able to understand/pick up in a short amount of time from the literature.  In fact I did a few essays that took lines of argument in areas so far off from what lecturers had covered I wondered if they would fail me, but they were the ones I actually did best in.  Sure, this is just my personal experience, but then I did modules in 4 different departments so it wasn't necessarily a narrow one.  So yes, you can get by in a degree by taking the lecturers line and not deviating from the suggested reading, but on the other hand I felt free to explore on my own and judging by my marks I think lecturers really prefer that.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

smmudge said:


> TBH having just completed an undergrad degree it doesn't really tie in with my experience. For all of my essays we were given a broad title or vague question allowing for many different angles of interpretation. I ended up using very little of the 'taught' materials really, and relied instead on whatever I could find in research - so the limit was only what I was able to understand/pick up in a short amount of time from the literature. In fact I did a few essays that took lines of argument in areas so far off from what lecturers had covered I wondered if they would fail me, but they were the ones I actually did best in. Sure, this is just my personal experience, but then I did modules in 4 different departments so it wasn't necessarily a narrow one. So yes, you can get by in a degree by taking the lecturers line and not deviating from the suggested reading, but on the other hand I felt free to explore on my own and judging by my marks I think lecturers really prefer that.


In my experience, they do. It shows originality for one - there's nothing like reading the same copied-word-for-word sections from books to make you appreciate that, and ability to demonstrate forming your own arguments and hypothesis when answering a question.


----------



## toggle (Aug 4, 2012)

Lo Siento. said:


> yeah, although there does seem to be enough to give a lot of it out to people studying stuff that is utterly trivial
> 
> And obviously doing it without funding implies either a massive amount of commitment or significant financial backing (between saving and doing masters, then saving and working during PhD, it will have taken me essentially a decade between deciding I wanted to do and and actually completing it)


 

from what i've been told, a lot of the funding depends on what is trendy at the time. my stuyff borders on what is currently popular, so i might be able to swing it.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

toggle said:


> from what i've been told, a lot of the funding depends on what is trendy at the time. my stuyff borders on what is currently popular, so i might be able to swing it.


There's definite trends in research, and if your stuff is currently 'in' or 'sexy' it's got more chance of being funded via certain routes. Some it doesn't matter so much, they just want the students who are most likely to complete. Also, if there's anything in your proposed research that could be relevant commercially, even slightly, mention it at the end. Unis are constantly getting squeezed on research becoming translated into real-world applications.


----------



## toggle (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There's definite trends in research, and if your stuff is currently 'in' or 'sexy' it's got more chance of being funded via certain routes. Some it doesn't matter so much, they just want the students who are most likely to complete. Also, if there's anything in your proposed research that could be relevant commercially, even slightly, mention it at the end. Unis are constantly getting squeezed on research becoming translated into real-world applications.


 
i'm studying history. the chances of commercial application are somewhere between 'none' and 'no fucking hope of that'. i might be able to skirt sexy.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

toggle said:


> i'm studying history. the chances of commercial application are somewhere between 'none' and 'no fucking hope of that'. i might be able to skirt sexy.


It's a silly provision for many subjects - the whole point of uni research is that it's fundamental and blue-sky, and a really really long way from real-life applications. Even subjects like engineering and maths don't always have a lot that is relevant.


----------



## toggle (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> It's a silly provision for many subjects - the whole point of uni research is that it's fundamental and blue-sky, and a really really long way from real-life applications. Even subjects like engineering and maths don't always have a lot that is relevant.


 
and sometimes the commercial aplications come along some time later, once someone else has read the original theoretical research findings.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 4, 2012)

I think the rot really set in in this country with the introduction of GCSE's.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There was an article in the latest Professional Engineering magazine from the IMechE that a significant number of engineering undergraduates are accepted without having maths at A level (or equivalent). For Engineering!!!
> 
> I was pretty horrified about that.


 
I was pretty horrified when my mate, who designs jet engines, said they gave him an engineering degree _without making him build a single bridge_! 

I don't want someone designing the engines on my plane when they possibly can't build a bridge.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

8ball said:


> I was pretty horrified when my mate, who designs jet engines, said they gave him an engineering degree _without making him build a single bridge_!
> 
> I don't want someone designing the engines on my plane when they possibly can't build a bridge.


Bridge building = civil engineering 
Jet engines = aeronautical or mechanical engineering

I was gutted I didn't get to drive a train as part of my engineering degree. You'd think they would


----------



## 8ball (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Bridge building = civil engineering
> Jet engines = aeronautical or mechanical engineering
> 
> I was gutted I didn't get to drive a train as part of my engineering degree. You'd think they would


 
Yes, that's a bit of a gip.

Though any kind of engineering and i'd expect at least one bridge.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

8ball said:


> Yes, that's a bit of a gip.
> 
> Though any kind of engineering and i'd expect at least one bridge.


I did do the theory behind bridges (moments and forces), just didn't get to build one. 

I bet Victorian engineering students got to build bridges


----------



## 8ball (Aug 4, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Is that without following the course at all or having done an AS level maybe? I think my sister finished the course but only 'accepted' the AS level grade and managed a reasonable 2:2 in Engineering. A levels have changed since I did them, I don't get all this accepting or not accepting a grade thingie.


 
I've never heard of this - can anyone explain?


----------



## Sapphireblue (Aug 4, 2012)

I think if it's you do a modular course, if there are say 6 modules, you could choose your best 3 marks and get just an AS level instead which is essentially half an A level. Not really worth doing i would have thought unless you really fuck up or don't finish a module. 

I actually did that some time ago before it was commonplace, when i did further maths A level and couldn't complete the 12th module. In hindsight, i wish i'd just taken the last exam even though i hadn't done the study and then i could have possibly got the A level.


----------



## toggle (Aug 4, 2012)

8ball said:


> I've never heard of this - can anyone explain?


 
I did a modular course. we got to specify the grade we would accept being awarded automatically, usually one that would give us the uni place we wanted, or we would get our module results and could then do resits or decide whether to accept the best half of our modules as an as. this was nearly 20 years back, so ti's not a new thing.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 4, 2012)

toggle said:


> I did a modular course. we got to specify the grade we would accept being awarded automatically, usually one that would give us the uni place we wanted, or we would get our module results and could then do resits or decide whether to accept the best half of our modules as an as. this was nearly 20 years back, so ti's not a new thing.



Wow - it's like plea bargaining.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 4, 2012)

I know it wasn't possible when I did mine back in 1991. All my courses were non-modular. I'm reasonably certain that my brothers didn't have the choice either, in 1993.

I wonder if it depended on which exam board your courses were done under?


----------



## toggle (Aug 4, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I know it wasn't possible when I did mine back in 1991. All my courses were non-modular. I'm reasonably certain that my brothers didn't have the choice either, in 1993.
> 
> I wonder if it depended on which exam board your courses were done under?


 
i think so. mine were in 93.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I don't mean independent as in _on your own _but as in totally free to follow where your research/reading/thought takes you.That might apply at Phd level, but what % of students are doing Phds?


It doesn't apply at PhD level, for a whole range of reasons.

Just one example - my faculty has said that certain facilities/space allocations can only be used to pursue research that "aligns with the strategic goals of the Faculty"


----------



## Lo Siento. (Aug 5, 2012)

toggle said:


> from what i've been told, a lot of the funding depends on what is trendy at the time. my stuyff borders on what is currently popular, so i might be able to swing it.


Yes and no. The chances of them funding my pseudo-new social history of UK labour militancy in the 60s and 70s was probably negligible because it's about as trendy as space hoppers, but whatever chance it did have of getting funding was screwed (ridiculously) by my non-perfect undergrad transcript. That and a lack of support from both departments I approached.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I know it wasn't possible when I did mine back in 1991. All my courses were non-modular. I'm reasonably certain that my brothers didn't have the choice either, in 1993.
> 
> I wonder if it depended on which exam board your courses were done under?


The same here. No way did we have this then (same years too)


----------



## 8ball (Aug 5, 2012)

The thing about all this bollocks is that the actual subject of study seems to become almost an irrelevance to the process of, well, processing people.

Even back when I did my (very early) GCSE's and subsequent A-levels there was so much talk about the marking schemes, 'key words and phrases' that the marking schemes would be looking for, 'exam strategy' (Ugh - bit sick in mouth, there) and the like that I felt like a right fucking weirdo for being actually interested in the subject.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

8ball said:


> The thing about all this bollocks is that the actual subject of study seems to become almost an irrelevance to the process of, well, processing people.
> 
> Even back when I did my (very early) GCSE's and subsequent A-levels there was so much talk about the marking schemes, 'key words and phrases' that the marking schemes would be looking for, 'exam strategy' (Ugh - bit sick in mouth, there) and the like that I felt like a right fucking weirdo for being actually interested in the subject.


I don't remember us being alerted to this new craze of phrases and key words. Maybe our teachers weren't up on this shit or maybe our exam boards hadn't fallen prey to this yet.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 5, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> I don't remember us being alerted to this new craze of phrases and key words. Maybe our teachers weren't up on this shit or maybe our exam boards hadn't fallen prey to this yet.


 
Which area was this in, and around what time out of interest?

In our area they were in the process of jumping ship from the local, rigorous examining board to Midland Examiners Group for many subjects - was so much easier to teach to the test and they never threw any curveballs.   It was the beginning of examiners playing to the market, where their 'deliverables' were based on grades achieved.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

8ball said:


> Which area was this in, and around what time out of interest?
> 
> In our area they were in the process of jumping ship from the local, rigorous examining board to Midland Examiners Group for many subjects - was so much easier to teach to the test and they never threw any curveballs. It was the beginning of examiners playing to the market, where their 'deliverables' were based on grades achieved.


I can't remember all the exam boards altho somewhere still got the certificates, northern examining board was one of them tho, Leeds 1989/91 gcses and a level.
Maybe they were tick box exercises and our teachers never said so, if that was the case, they did fairly well getting so much (relative) success. The science teaching stands out as spectacularly bad tho, not actually finishing teaching us the syllabus.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 5, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> I can't remember all the exam boards altho somewhere still got the certificates, northern examining board was one of them tho, Leeds 1989/91 gcses and a level.
> Maybe they were tick box exercises and our teachers never said so, if that was the case, they did fairly well getting so much (relative) success. The science teaching stands out as spectacularly bad tho, not actually finishing teaching us the syllabus.


 
Fair enough - I was 90 for GCSE's and 92 for A-levels.  Maybe they hadn't cottoned onto it in your area, maybe the examining group wasn't easy to 'mine' for grades in this way (like I said my school was changing to exam boards that could be more easily exploited), maybe they had too much integrity to teach to the test or maybe they just weren't terribly 'competent' (in terms of maximising grades rather than educating).


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

Quite a lot of our subjects (well ok English) was 100% coursework. Which for some reason certain idiots think as much easier than one off three hour exam rather than two years of never ever ending English assignments. 
I'd have rather dossed around for two years and then pulled an A out of the hat for only three hours work anyday.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 5, 2012)

The article in the OP is no doubt right about U.S universities and the mix of the corporate and sorority shite. Increasingly you could tell a similar tale about our HE sector - unilad type stuff, extreme mangerialism - along with, just as bad, redundancies. However I always have a problem with the defence of the 'tradtiional university' and scholarship 'for its own sake'. Those were just as hierarchical, conservative, unquestioning and elitist - with, if anything, even less place for the working class. Each era uses different language and mechanisms for reproducing advantage, but there was no golden age. Just pisses me off (completely separte from this thread) that so much of the liberal left in their rejection of the new generation of spiv managers, fall back on a 'liberal education' without really digging into what it was.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There was an article in the latest Professional Engineering magazine from the IMechE that a significant number of engineering undergraduates are accepted without having maths at A level (or equivalent). For Engineering!!!
> 
> I was pretty horrified about that.


 
This it whats holds engineering back. Engineering is about the practical application of science not about an ability to do pure maths. There are a number of engineering fields which are process or system based engineering where the mathematics required is only a little more complex than that taught at primary school. There are also plenty of engineering fields that due to the use of computers also have little or no use of maths beyond primary school level. But due to the insistence of the engineering council and academics two to three years wasted battling with complex mathematics that will never be used outside of academia (and probably just lecturing in it) by the vast majority in the engineering world.

This wasted time could be used teaching engineers much more valuable non engineering skills. In some fields its as important to be able to build trusting relationships with clients and fellow design professionals and constructors than it is to triple differentiate a split conundrum. These skills are sorely lacking in engineering education.

The article here http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldsctech/37/37.pdf seems to clearly relate to A Levels and not other forms of education. I wonder how many of the 20% in engineering have entered via vocational qualifications (HND,BTEC etc). For many years these provided many not A Level students to engineering courses not sure about today though.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There's definite trends in research, and if your stuff is currently 'in' or 'sexy' it's got more chance of being funded via certain routes. Some it doesn't matter so much, they just want the students who are most likely to complete. Also, if there's anything in your proposed research that could be relevant commercially, even slightly, mention it at the end. Unis are constantly getting squeezed on research becoming translated into real-world applications.


that would imply there was actually some underlying logic to it.

Leeds Uni has recently closed a fire engineering degree course that had 100% graduate employment record, and employers queing up to take on their graduates as it was one of only 2 such courses in the country and was the longest running of the 2...because it hadn't met recruitment targets, despite the department being relieved of the actual recruitment responsibilities.

That entire department is an absolute shambles, and I really don't understand why their students haven't sued the university for some of the stuff they've done in the last few years.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> This it whats holds engineering back. Engineering is about the practical application of science not about an ability to do pure maths. There are a number of engineering fields which are process or system based engineering where the mathematics required is only a little more complex than that taught at primary school. There are also plenty of engineering fields that due to the use of computers also have little or no use of maths beyond primary school level. But due to the insistence of the engineering council and academics two to three years wasted battling with complex mathematics that will never be used outside of academia (and probably just lecturing in it) by the vast majority in the engineering world.
> 
> This wasted time could be used teaching engineers much more valuable non engineering skills. In some fields its as important to be able to build trusting relationships with clients and fellow design professionals and constructors than it is to triple differentiate a split conundrum. These skills are sorely lacking in engineering education.
> 
> The article here http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldsctech/37/37.pdf seems to clearly relate to A Levels and not other forms of education. I wonder how many of the 20% in engineering have entered via vocational qualifications (HND,BTEC etc). For many years these provided many not A Level students to engineering courses not sure about today though.


but ability to understand basic maths concepts is an essential underpinning to all engineering really.

That said, I think I'd be right in saying most engineering departments have always taken promising students without maths, but with some sciences, but made them take some form of maths foundation course prior to starting, or in the first year... as long as they had GCSE maths. So I do agree to some extent.

Annecdotally (from me dad), the actual quality of the work produced by his students, and the misunderstanding and none application of basic engineering principles such as sanity checking results to make sure they aren't a factor of 1000 out etc. seems to be declining in rough proportion to the actual increase in the A-level entry requirements. ie the students 15 years ago who only needed EEB were much more capable on average than the students today who need something like ABB to get in. Much of this has to be laid at the door of the piss poor teaching by lecturers with virtually no industry experience, teaching time that's half what it used to be, and shockingly bad restructuring of courses to remove key elements of the courses and replace them with a central core of courses that all students in the department do in the first 2 years regardless of specialism... plus daft stuff like moving the dissertation to the 2nd year when the students haven't actually learnt the basic yet.

My dad's seen as a renegade for refusing to water his modules down, and forcing the students to attend twice as many lectures as for other modules, because this is the number of lectures needed to actually teach the subject to the same standard as he's always taught it...

Frankly, I'd view an MEng now as being just about equivalent to a BEng 20 years ago, but would still only view the top 25% or so as actually having the level of understanding of the subject that I'd view as making them competent in the field. Another 25% will probably be ok with some mentoring in industry, with the remaining 50% or so being an accident waiting to happen if they're given any sort of level of responsibility without a lot of supervision.

Judging from the exam paper answers I've looked through, and some of the shouts of frustration that I've heard coming from my dad when marking papers recently, and his assessments of them.

but I probably should stop there before I get him in more trouble.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

My bro in law complained about the teaching on his electrical engineering at sheffield uni, said one lecturer barely spoke english and just regurgitated a text book. They also have got undergrads to mark each others work wtf?


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

as far as I can see, it all stems from the take over of the management of universities by a layer of professional non-academic adminstrators / managers, who just view it all as a business and don't have a clue about actual teaching requirements to maintain standards, or any of the courses they're taking decisions about.

They're destroying the standards of one of the aspects of the UK that we've been internationally renowned for for decades / centuries, and in doing so they're also destroying the standards of graduates that we're sending out into the business world, which in engineering terms can only lead to increases in basic errors that cost huge amounts to fix after the event, and will inevitably cost lives.

We're involved in a consultancy issue for a company involving the HSE, where it turns out 3 HSE inspectors don't even understand the basics of the point of law they're attempting to apply - which indicates not only that they missed that specific point in their lectures, but also that they don't understand the background logic underlying the legislation on that point. They have also managed to miss the actual cause of the problem as well, which boils down to an engineer recently making a modification to an old system without understanding the reason that aspect of the system was needed....... erm, but I probably can't say any more, except that the end result wasn't good for the end user hence the HSE involvement.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> but ability to understand basic maths concepts is an essential underpinning to all engineering really.
> 
> That said, I think I'd be right in saying most engineering departments have always taken promising students without maths, but with some sciences, but made them take some form of maths foundation course prior to starting, or in the first year... as long as they had GCSE maths. So I do agree to some extent.
> 
> ...


 
I agree about the ability to understand basic maths concepts. The level required to be undertaken to meet Engineering Council and the likes requirements is very questionable for many engineering professions.

Ahh sanity checking and the arrogance of graduates. A subject all on its own. That is why engineering is a much more experiential subject than an academic one than most people recognise. The ability to look at a problem and scope of the order of answer without little more than a pen and paper is only gained from many years of experience and that experience is crucial as part of the informal education for engineers. 

As for the ability of an engineer to excel based on their grades my experience is mixed. In my experience often the top grades have low communication skills  and their undoubted ability is limited in its usefulness by this. Not worked with many 3rds or unclassifieds but 2:2's and 2:1's are generally good enough if mentored correctly once they get into the work arena.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> This it whats holds engineering back. Engineering is about the practical application of science not about an ability to do pure maths. There are a number of engineering fields which are process or system based engineering where the mathematics required is only a little more complex than that taught at primary school. There are also plenty of engineering fields that due to the use of computers also have little or no use of maths beyond primary school level. But due to the insistence of the engineering council and academics two to three years wasted battling with complex mathematics that will never be used outside of academia (and probably just lecturing in it) by the vast majority in the engineering world.
> 
> This wasted time could be used teaching engineers much more valuable non engineering skills. In some fields its as important to be able to build trusting relationships with clients and fellow design professionals and constructors than it is to triple differentiate a split conundrum. These skills are sorely lacking in engineering education.
> 
> The article here http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldsctech/37/37.pdf seems to clearly relate to A Levels and not other forms of education. I wonder how many of the 20% in engineering have entered via vocational qualifications (HND,BTEC etc). For many years these provided many not A Level students to engineering courses not sure about today though.


But the basics of applied maths are essential for any engineering subject. I'm not talking about pure maths.

Having assisted with undergraduate math tutorials for 4 years and engineering for another 3, to me it was clear that some students did not have the basics to enable them to them to actual attempt the course. The uni I taught at clearly agreed as they were forced to insist undergrads did a test in their first maths class to assess their ability, and them stream them accordingly. With the advent of modularisation at universities - my year was the last non-modular year to graduate - large chunks of the course were dropped altogether between my year and theirs to facilitate a study week and to ensure all teaching completed in modules.

The modular approach does not work for engineering, in my opinion, there is too much to build on and learn on a continuous basis.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> But the basics of applied maths are essential for any engineering subject. I'm not talking about pure maths.


 
Basics maybe, but how basic do you need?

I seriously know few engineers who do very little beyond add, subtract, multiply, and divide by hand. Everything else is either not required or done by a programme.

What engineering fields have you worked it where much more than this is required?


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> As for the ability of an engineer to excel based on their grades my experience is mixed. In my experience often the top grades have low communication skills and their undoubted ability is limited in its usefulness by this. Not worked with many 3rds or unclassifieds but 2:2's and 2:1's are generally good enough if mentored correctly once they get into the work arena.


fwiw, I'm talking about the levels actually coming through now, which are significantly different even to 5 years ago.

It's only one department, but I get the impression that the experience is relatively widespread, and can only get worse as the older generation retire and take their course notes, work ethic and decades of experience with them.

For instance in that department, they actually were subsumed as a department into one big department, and lost their head of department position in 2003 or so. Since that point they've had their courses / modules continually watered down, and amalgamated with only vaguely related modules from the core discipline of the larger department they merged with. They've lost several highly experienced older staff who'd been teaching the basic modules for decades, as well as world respected industry CPD courses etc, who've been replaced with far less experienced junior lecturers with sod all industry experience, who promptly drop half the old module lectures as it's too big a workload, and from the evidence I've seen, don't actually seem to understand some of the basics themselves - or at least they're marking stuff as being correct that's actually fundamentally wrong when it gets second marked.

look out world......


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> Basics maybe, but how basic do you need?
> 
> I seriously know few engineers who do very little beyond add, subtract, multiply, and divide by hand. Everything else is either not required or done by a programme.
> 
> What engineering fields have you worked it where much more than this is required?


Mechanical Engineering and Biomedical Engineering.

Setting up programmes to run is all well and good, but if you are unable to do a hand calculation to check the computer results against, how do you know if it's even in the right ballpark, let alone whether it's correct.

It's standard practice at the company where I worked, and many calculations have to be signed off by a Chartered Engineer as well.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> Basics maybe, but how basic do you need?
> 
> I seriously know few engineers who do very little beyond add, subtract, multiply, and divide by hand. Everything else is either not required or done by a programme.
> 
> What engineering fields have you worked it where much more than this is required?


IMO all engineers should be capable of reproducing the calcs done by computers by hand in the field, or at least verifying that the figures are in the correct ballpark if required if they want to be viewed as a proper engineer as opposed to merely a desk jockey.

I'm not even technically a recognised engineer btw, but if I couldn't do that in my chosen field, I'd not view myself as being competent to do my job, even if I could feed some figures into a computer programme and see if it said yes or no.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

And to follow up your next question, what, yes I work in industry, not in academia.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> IMO all engineers should be capable of reproducing the calcs done by computers by hand in the field, or at least verifying that the figures are in the correct ballpark if required if they want to be viewed as a proper engineer as opposed to merely a desk jockey.
> 
> I'm not even technically a recognised engineer btw, but if I couldn't do that in my chosen field, I'd not view myself as being competent to do my job, even if I could feed some figures into a computer programme and see if it said yes or no.


It's amazing how many of the junior engineers can do basic approximations in their heads too, they always reach for the calculator.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Mechanical Engineering and Biomedical Engineering.
> 
> Setting up programmes to run is all well and good, but if you are unable to do a hand calculation to check the computer results against, how do you know if it's even in the right ballpark, let alone whether it's correct.
> 
> It's standard practice at the company where I worked, and many calculations have to be signed off by a Chartered Engineer as well.


 
As freespirit said part of being a good engineer is being able to sanity check yours and others results.If calculations are done by hand or by computer you can still be a mile of with a simple slipped decimal point etc.

Signing off by another (often chartered engineer) is I believe standard practice. But the person signing off is not redoing the calculations just checking the principles and ball park figures.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> IMO all engineers should be capable of reproducing the calcs done by computers by hand in the field, or at least verifying that the figures are in the correct ballpark if required if they want to be viewed as a proper engineer as opposed to merely a desk jockey.


 
Engineering software has got so complex that it would take far to long to reproduce the calcs they produce. Have you seen the sort of data a CFD or thermal model study produces.

This in turn allows for far greater analysis of the problem being studied and in addition often the ability through one model to analyse multiple aspects of a problem. There is no way in the field you could replicate this. Which is where the sanity checking comes back in.

Interestingly there is a whole field of specialists (generally MEng students who think they are the bees knees) who now input the data into these models and provide analysis. This is then checked by an engineer who often immediately goes down the pub to try and stop his uncontrollable laughter at the results and analysis carried out.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> Engineering software has got so complex that it would take far to long to reproduce the calcs they produce. Have you seen the sort of data a CFD or thermal model study produces.
> 
> This in turn allows for far greater analysis of the problem being studied and in addition often the ability through one model to analyse multiple aspects of a problem. There is no way in the field you could replicate this. Which is where the sanity checking comes back in.
> 
> Interestingly there is a whole field of specialists (generally MEng students who think they are the bees knees) who now input the data into these models and provide analysis. This is then checked by an engineer who often immediately goes down the pub to try and stop his uncontrollable laughter at the results and analysis carried out.


Yes, we get a lot of that at our place. Hysterical


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> As freespirit said part of being a good engineer is being able to sanity check yours and others results.If calculations are done by hand or by computer you can still be a mile of with a simple slipped decimal point etc.
> 
> Signing off by another (often chartered engineer) is I believe standard practice. But the person signing off is not redoing the calculations just checking the principles and ball park figures.


Free spirit and I made the same point. 

Our process is one engineer performs calc, one engineer (more senior) checks calc, third engineer (even more senior) checks, reviews and only if they are happy are they signed off.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> Engineering software has got so complex that it would take far to long to reproduce the calcs they produce. Have you seen the sort of data a CFD or thermal model study produces.
> 
> This in turn allows for far greater analysis of the problem being studied and in addition often the ability through one model to analyse multiple aspects of a problem. There is no way in the field you could replicate this. Which is where the sanity checking comes back in.


 
yeah, I appreciate that, which is why I said 'or at least verifying they're in the correct ball park'.

for me that doesn't just include being able to do the calcs by hand, it just means they must have a way of verifying this without a computer, which could be via comparison with previous situations, but generally they should be able to demonstrate the figure at least isn't wildly out if challenged on site by those who actually have to put their figures into practice.

Or I suppose to be able to recognise if the data they've received actually makes sense - eg if a decimal point has been missed out etc. to not just feed that data into the machine and then present the results as if they mean anything.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Or I suppose to be able to recognise if the data they've received actually makes sense - eg if a decimal point has been missed out etc. to not just feed that data into the machine and then present the results as if they mean anything.


 
That's not just engineering that has that problem - it's everywhere.

This is why you should have to build a fucking bridge - if you finish it and it only goes 1% of the way across the river, you fail the degree.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

8ball said:


> That's not just engineering that has that problem - it's everywhere.
> 
> This is why you should have to build a fucking bridge - if you finish it and it only goes 1% of the way across the river, you fail the degree.


true, and I'm sure I must have been taught that at some stage even as a non engineer.

Could just be that I picked it up from my dad banging on about it though, but I reckon my BSc degree was pretty good on this sort of thing as well, with a decent amount of focus on basic research methods etc.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> true, and I'm sure I must have been taught that at some stage even as a non engineer.
> 
> Could just be that I picked it up from my dad banging on about it though, but I reckon my BSc degree was pretty good on this sort of thing as well, with a decent amount of focus on basic research methods etc.


 
What we are basically dealing with is the type of person that drives into a river 'because their satnav told them to'.

They're everywhere.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> yeah, I appreciate that, which is why I said 'or at least verifying they're in the correct ball park'.
> 
> for me that doesn't just include being able to do the calcs by hand, it just means they must have a way of verifying this without a computer, which could be via comparison with previous situations, but generally they should be able to demonstrate the figure at least isn't wildly out if challenged on site by those who actually have to put their figures into practice.
> 
> Or I suppose to be able to recognise if the data they've received actually makes sense - eg if a decimal point has been missed out etc. to not just feed that data into the machine and then present the results as if they mean anything.


 
I think we are probably agreeing!

As for not listening to those on site who actually have to put their figures into practice I couldn't agree more. The ability to have the humility to listen and change your design when wrong is a crucial part of being a good engineer. Not something the current generation have a lot of truck with to be honest.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Free spirit and I made the same point.
> 
> Our process is one engineer performs calc, one engineer (more senior) checks calc, third engineer (even more senior) checks, reviews and only if they are happy are they signed off.


As I just said to Freespirit I think we are agreeing!!!!

Out of interest what level of detail are the first and second checks.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

tbf, I did get on the newcastle to leeds train yesterday, saw a seat that was still showing as being reserve from newcastle to edinburgh, thought that was odd, but still sat down, was a bit bemused to then find someone saying they'd reserved that seat... but still went and sat down in another seat, and only clocked I was on the wrong train as we headed out through Byker to the north of Newcastle.

In my defence, I was severely hungover.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 5, 2012)

8ball said:


> What we are basically dealing with is the type of person that drives into a river 'because their satnav told them to'.
> 
> They're everywhere.


They're *not* everywhere. They're drowned in rivers or stuck down narrow lanes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> tbf, I did get on the newcastle to leeds train yesterday, saw a seat that was still showing as being reserve from newcastle to edinburgh, thought that was odd, but still sat down, was a bit bemused to then find someone saying they'd reserved that seat... but still went and sat down in another seat, and only clocked I was on the wrong train as we headed out through Byker to the north of Newcastle.
> 
> In my defence, I was severely hungover.


Should have gone to specsavers


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> tbf, I did get on the newcastle to leeds train yesterday, saw a seat that was still showing as being reserve from newcastle to edinburgh, thought that was odd, but still sat down, was a bit bemused to then find someone saying they'd reserved that seat... but still went and sat down in another seat, and only clocked I was on the wrong train as we headed out through Byker to the north of Newcastle.
> 
> In my defence, I was severely hungover.


Ooops


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> I think we are probably agreeing!
> 
> As for not listening to those on site who actually have to put their figures into practice I couldn't agree more. The ability to have the humility to listen and change your design when wrong is a crucial part of being a good engineer. Not something the current generation have a lot of truck with to be honest.


I think you're probably right.

You're also dealing with more complex engineering challenges than the stuff we're doing from the sounds of it, and tbf I was seriously impressed with the MEng graduate I took on, though they'd done their first engineering degree in Serbia.

I don't actually know if the students we get passed to assist with dissertation projects etc are BEng, or BSc students, though I'm certain that them doing it in their 2nd years is ridiculous as they really don't know what they're talking about at that stage in the course.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Ooops


worst thing being it was the express that basically didn't stop until edinburgh. It actually gave me chance to sober up though, which was probably a good thing.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> As I just said to Freespirit I think we are agreeing!!!!
> 
> Out of interest what level of detail are the first and second checks.


Can't really post too much detail about it on the internet, but the calc needs to be comprehensive - from assumptions being correct and stated through to derivation of equations of required. Signs and arithmetic also checked. 

Attention to detail is key, especially when you're trying to explain to a client why their expensive engineering job isn't working the way it should be, and more importantly, what you're going to do about it to make sure it does work.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> worst thing being it was the express that basically didn't stop until edinburgh. It actually gave me chance to sober up though, which was probably a good thing.


You could have waved at my parents on the way


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> You could have waved at my parents on the way


I'll be sure to remember that next time I've going from Newcastle to Leeds...


----------



## 8ball (Aug 5, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> They're *not* everywhere. They're drowned in rivers or stuck down narrow lanes.


 
We're going to need more rivers and narrow lanes if we are going to catch all of them.


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Can't really post too much detail about it on the internet, but the calc needs to be comprehensive - from assumptions being correct and stated through to derivation of equations of required. Signs and arithmetic also checked.
> 
> Attention to detail is key, especially when you're trying to explain to a client why their expensive engineering job isn't working the way it should be, and more importantly, what you're going to do about it to make sure it does work.


 
It sounds like your calcs are done by hand not computer. Is that correct?


----------



## what (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> worst thing being it was the express that basically didn't stop until edinburgh. It actually gave me chance to sober up though, which was probably a good thing.


How was Edinburgh?


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> It sounds like your calcs are done by hand not computer. Is that correct?


Both. we use a variety of computer packages throughout all stages of the design process. Some component, some subsystem, some whole system. CFD and thermal power also feature heavily - obviously hand calcs aren't always possible here, as you've already discussed.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

8ball said:


> We're going to need more rivers and narrow lanes if we are going to catch all of them.


 
send them up to the Highlands, plenty of both with added cows and sheep.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

what said:


> How was Edinburgh?


I was there for a grand total of 5 minutes, but in that time I concluded it'd be a bit full of luvies and 'look at me I'm really wacky' types for my liking, particularly with a hangover.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Bridge building = civil engineering
> Jet engines = aeronautical or mechanical engineering
> 
> I was gutted I didn't get to drive a train as part of my engineering degree. You'd think they would


Formula student should be good, I am a rather good driver with years of experience under my belt, muahahahahah.



_angel_ said:


> I can't remember all the exam boards altho somewhere still got the certificates, northern examining board was one of them tho, Leeds 1989/91 gcses and a level.
> 
> Maybe they were tick box exercises and our teachers never said so, if that was the case, they did fairly well getting so much (relative) success. The science teaching stands out as spectacularly bad tho, not actually finishing teaching us the syllabus.


Not only can't I find the certificates for my GCSEs, but some of the exam boards I did aren't even on the UCAS application system any more.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

free spirit said:


> I was there for a grand total of 5 minutes, but in that time I concluded it'd be a bit full of luvies and 'look at me I'm really wacky' types for my liking, particularly with a hangover.


A safe bet at this time of year, sadly.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> Formula student should be good, I am a rather good driver with years of experience under my belt, muahahahahah.
> 
> 
> Not only can't I find the certificates for my GCSEs, but some of the exam boards I did aren't even on the UCAS application system any more.


You do know you're going to blow a lot of impressionable young minds when you go to uni in the autumn? Good at maths and cars


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> You do know you're going to blow a lot of impressionable young minds when you go to uni in the autumn? Good at maths and cars


Massive norks too, and then there's the dress sense. I'm not taking any weed on site, just in case.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> Massive norks too, and then there's the dress sense. I'm not taking any weed on site, just in case.


I'll grant they'll be momentarily fascinated by the norks, but if you can't pull your weight in lab experiments or group work, the norks won't mean anything. Which is good 

If there's one another woman on the course, you'll be doing well.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2012)

the perversion of scholarship via stuff_it's massive norks?


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I'll grant they'll be momentarily fascinated by the norks, but if you can't pull your weight in lab experiments or group work, the norks won't mean anything. Which is good
> 
> If there's one another woman on the course, you'll be doing well.


The mech eng department works closely with the industrial design students, which should be interesting. At the open day there were loads of female design students, but I was the only female mech eng student. Should be fun. At least I know I can handle a spanner (both senses of the word).



free spirit said:


> the perversion of scholarship via stuff_it's massive norks?


I expect that there may be some of that going on.


----------



## toggle (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> Formula student should be good, I am a rather good driver with years of experience under my belt, muahahahahah.
> 
> 
> Not only can't I find the certificates for my GCSEs, but some of the exam boards I did aren't even on the UCAS application system any more.


 
i had to call up my old schools to find out what exam boards they did.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> The mech eng department works closely with the industrial design students, which should be interesting. At the open day there were loads of female design students, but I was the only female mech eng student. Should be fun. At least I know I can handle a spanner (both senses of the word).


 
I enjoyed my degree course immensely. It was fun - hard work, for certain, but still fun.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

toggle said:


> i had to call up my old schools to find out what exam boards they did.


Mine were Midland Examining Group or Oxford exam board, but even by the early nineties there was a dozen or so at least. Cambridge and Northern are the other two that spring readily to mind.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Mine were Midland Examining Group or Oxford exam board, but even by the early nineties there was a dozen or so at least. Cambridge and Northern are the other two that spring readily to mind.


I made some up I think, or put in ones that sounded likely. Anyway, unconditional offer is unconditional so I don't really give a monkeys. *shrug*

Mine were mainly MEG and Oxford, but there weren't options in the drop down for stuff like Combined Science, which was harder than Integrated Science.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

Anyone that demands to see your GCSEs from twenty plus years ago needs a slap anyway.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Anyone that demands to see your GCSEs from twenty plus years ago needs a slap anyway.


They didn't, pretty much got in based on my OU marks.



toggle said:


> i had to call up my old schools to find out what exam boards they did.


My old school has become a 'Sports Academy'


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Anyone that demands to see your GCSEs from twenty plus years ago needs a slap anyway.


Meet my current employers who wanted copies of every exam certificate, including training course certificates!


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Meet my current employers who wanted copies of every exam certificate, including training course certificates!


Dearie me what if you've mislaid them? As it is I think either I or my proud mother has  got them in a box somewhere.
How long do schools and exam boards keep the details of results for? 
At least my mum hasn't done what my grandma did to my dad's teaching diploma and have it framed on the wall!


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Dearie me what if you've mislaid them? As it is I think either I or my proud mother has got them in a box somewhere.
> How long do schools and exam boards keep the details of results for?
> At least my mum hasn't done what my grandma did to my dad's teaching diploma and have it framed on the wall!


I honestly don't know.

With all the upheaval in the exam board sector since I got mine, I don't even think the exam board is still going, let alone knowing what happened to any records they had.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I honestly don't know.
> 
> With all the upheaval in the exam board sector since I got mine, I don't even think the exam board is still going, let alone knowing what happened to any records they had.


I'm slightly worried about this, as mine were lost in a squat eviction in the mid 90s.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I'm slightly worried about this, as mine were lost in a squat eviction in the mid 90s.


There must be some kind of mechanism to get some form of statement - I just don't know what it is.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 5, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> There must be some kind of mechanism to get some form of statement - I just don't know what it is.


I'm just going to cross my fingers and hope that if I get good enough marks they won't bother. 

I know Uni isn't bothered...


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I'm just going to cross my fingers and hope that if I get good enough marks they won't bother.
> 
> I know Uni isn't bothered...


If uni isn't bothered by now, it's probably fine.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 5, 2012)

My old history teacher went to Oxford and said back then, they issued no paper certificates cos they thought the word of the person should be enough. I'm guessing that's changed now! There surely must be some records somewhere. If I lose em I sure as hell aren't doing em again!


----------



## xenon (Aug 5, 2012)

Fuck knows where my GCSE certs are. The school I took half of them at has closed anyway. Isn't all this rubbish supposed to be on a centralised database. Bits of stupid paper you're meant to hang on to FFS. Not had a job interview for a few months but pretty sure it wasn't a problem. Though they wanted to see everything. Well, I had the interview...

I still have my London Record of Achievement folder. *proud* Bit hard to lose that one as it's an A3 sized faux leather bit of 90's nonsense.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I'm just going to cross my fingers and hope that if I get good enough marks they won't bother.
> 
> I know Uni isn't bothered...


If you're ever asked you can get a Statement of Results from the relevant exam boards by following the instructions on this website:
http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/help-and-support/94-articles/264-getting-copies-of-exam-certificates


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

free spirit said:


> fwiw, I'm talking about the levels actually coming through now, which are significantly different even to 5 years ago.
> 
> It's only one department, but I get the impression that the experience is relatively widespread, and can only get worse as the older generation retire and take their course notes, work ethic and decades of experience with them.
> 
> ...


What you say resonates with much of what I heard from lecturers at my old Uni.
The 1990's saw universities transformed from educational institutions into businesses. The name of the game changed from pursuit of academic excellence to bums-on-seats. Entry standards were relaxed and new courses created to maximise BoS. And from what I hear, bums is just what they got. The role of tutors in lab sessions used to be to advise students and provide guidance on procedure. Now I gather it is focussed on maintaining order and stopping idiots from wrecking stuff.


I also heard that on seeing all this, the smartest staff moved to industry or overseas, leaving behind the dross and the coasters...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

What were your criticisms of of the higher entry-standards of the pre-1990s universities then Dr Jon?


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I don't mean independent as in _on your own _but as in totally free to follow where your research/reading/thought takes you.That might apply at Phd level, but what % of students are doing Phds?


more and more really part of the whole sale privatisation of education and tuition fees is designed to take the current unis to post grad status so they can compete commercially with the US Universities and do more and more post grad work which they can then licence and profit from, there was a big thing about how this was essential for the survival of the unis on one side and basically the end of the traditional right to an education cycle we have had up til now as one of the main arguments against the tuition fees early on...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

What is? I'm trying to establish what independent study is. My contention is that you can't do it at university (or you may be able to do so at the elitest level) - state or private, pre-now or before. So moaning about the death of independent study via universities is pointless.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

8ball said:


> What we are basically dealing with is the type of person that drives into a river 'because their satnav told them to'.
> 
> They're everywhere.


Watch thou for the fuckwit!


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What is? I'm trying to establish what independent study is. My contention is that you can't do it a university (or you may be able to do so at the elitest level) - state or private. So moaning about the death of independent study via universities is pointless.


yes i understand that but it appears to be coming from the point of view that this isn't prevalent within current uni culture, where as it's the sole purpose of the current educational system.  

and being obtuse about it being independent study if we use such a reducto absurdium argument then no learning which isn't self actualised is independent... studying from a text regardless of source isn't independent its absorbing someone else's knowledge and therefore is no longer independent... so maybe you've phrased this as a point of argument rather than having any validity as question what so ever within the context of the thread.

I mean as far as your original point goes it was pointless you making it at all... you can hardly complain that others have then responded to your pointless post as their comments around it being also pointless without conceding this... you see... 

thanks for playing... insert more coins to continue...


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What were your criticisms of of the higher entry-standards of the pre-1990s universities then Dr Jon?


No criticism required: they let me in with a HNC!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> yes i understand that but it appears to be coming from the point of view that this isn't prevalent within current uni culture, where as it's the sole purpose of the current educational system.
> 
> and being obtuse about it being independent study if we use such a reducto absurdium argument then no learning which isn't self actualised is independent... studying from a text regardless of source isn't independent its absorbing someone else's knowledge and therefore is no longer independent... so maybe you've phrased this as a point of argument rather than having any validity as question what so ever within the context of the thread.
> 
> ...


You what luv?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> No criticism required: they let me in with a HNC!


I thought you'd be principled enough to argue that the entry levels meant people like you should have been strangled at birth? Odd that it changes when it's you involved.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> You what luv?


you got it....


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> you got it....


No, i didn't, that was a wall of drivel.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I thought you'd be principled enough to argue that the entry levels meant people like you should have been strangled at birth? Odd that it changes when it's you involved.


WTF are you on about?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> WTF are you on about?


You can't work out the contradiction between your moaning about entry levels and your own shit entry?


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No, i didn't, that was a wall of drivel.


wriggle, wriggle....

yeah you did... 

awr bless it's nice to see you in full form today spoiling for a ruck with one and all, it's a damn shame no ones biting though... they're always funny when you kick off...

if you want you can just abuse me and I'll pretend I'm engaging with it all if that gives you the release you're after?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Thanks for that, whatever it was.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> You can't work out the contradiction between your moaning about entry levels and your own shit entry?


Shit entry?
HNC was not only equivalent to A-levels, but had the advantage that HNC entrants had experience of working in the real world.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> Shit entry?
> HNC was not only equivalent to A-levels, but had the advantage that HNC entrants had experience of working in the real world.


So what's your whinging point about easy entry then ffs.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> So what's your whinging point about easy entry then ffs.


Think about it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> Think about it.


I have. Now what?


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I have. Now what?


I guess your application was unsuccessful?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> I guess your entry was not accepted?


Oh come on.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> I guess your application was unsuccessful?


I'm beginning to see why tbh...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> I'm beginning to see why tbh...


What is it that you are begininging to see why?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> What you say resonates with much of what I heard from lecturers at my old Uni.
> The 1990's saw universities transformed from educational institutions into businesses. The name of the game changed from pursuit of academic excellence to bums-on-seats. Entry standards were relaxed and new courses created to maximise BoS. And from what I hear, bums is just what they got. The role of tutors in lab sessions used to be to advise students and provide guidance on procedure. Now I gather it is focussed on maintaining order and stopping idiots from wrecking stuff.
> 
> 
> I also heard that on seeing all this, the smartest staff moved to industry or overseas, leaving behind the dross and the coasters...


 
That's a fairly sweeping, and massively fatuous take on what actually happened. Let's tackle your points one by one though, just to give them a fair hearing.

1) Transformation: The '90s saw the conversion of Polys to universities, but contrary to popular belief this didn't result in a dumbing down, but merely to a broadening of the subject base and the qualification base. In fact most Polys had specialisms that matched or outshone traditional universities. The largest single cause of a shift in the student base was the erosion of grant. It pretty much removed all the "playing field-levelling" done from the '50s-onward.

2) Businesses: Most universities not endowed with the resources of Oxbridge or the older redbricks, have always run themselves as businesses. There's no choice but to do so if you don't have massive reserves of cash and land to insulate you. Perhaps what you mean is that *managerialism* was introduced in an attempt to turn education into a more tangible commodity?

3) Entry standards: This one is a fairly bad joke - UCAS etc is a farce. Universities have the power to ignore your A level results and offer you a place regardless, and often do so in _quid pro quo_ situations, or situations where there is a clear benefit to them to do so. If your argument is that A level results have less value now than previously, that's not an issue where responsibility resides with universities, but rather with government, with schools and with examination boards.

4) Maintaining order: I haven't heard of any riot, semi-riot or even severe disorder situations being prevalent in universities. I've heard some horrible stories about F.E. colleges, but that's an entirely different kettle of piscines.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What is? I'm trying to establish what independent study is. My contention is that you can't do it at university (or you may be able to do so at the elitest level) - state or private, pre-now or before. So moaning about the death of independent study via universities is pointless.


 
Fair point. All university study, at whatever level, and including academics, is multiplely-mediated.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> No criticism required: they let me in with a HNC!


 
An HNC was always intended as a doorway to degree-level study as well as a vocational qualification, though.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's a fairly sweeping, and massively fatuous take on what actually happened
> ...


I'm just going off what I was told by ex-lecturers, some years after I graduated. I have no reason to suspect that they would lie about this.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> I'm just going off what I was told by ex-lecturers, some years after I graduated. I have no reason to suspect that they would lie about this.


 
Who's talking about lying? It's usual behaviour to colour anecdotes for effect when you're relating something "sensational" to someone, especially if what you're relating reinforces a pre-existing narrative or opinion. I believe that journalists call the practice "lending weight".


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Who's talking about lying? It's usual behaviour to colour anecdotes for effect when you're relating something "sensational" to someone, especially if what you're relating reinforces a pre-existing narrative or opinion. I believe that journalists call the practice "lending weight".


Hmmmm.

I recall that the _managerialism_ you mention was a particular bitching-point...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> Hmmmm.
> 
> I recall that the _managerialism_ you mention was a particular bithching-point...


 
As it has become throughout the public sector, When you concern yourself more about feeding the bureaucratic beast with data about your outputs, than with the quality (or otherwise) of the outputs, then quality inevitably suffers. It can't *not* suffer, however much you adhere to "best practice" in gathering your data. Unfortunately, managerialism reflects and reinforces political needs - our governments of the last 20 years (at least) have inculcated a culture of "results" and of "results delivery" that has had a harsh effect on quality of service. Unfortunately for the real world, the sort of results that managerialism delivers can be attained *despite* shonky service provision, rather than only through good service provision.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What were your criticisms of of the higher entry-standards of the pre-1990s universities then Dr Jon?


Do you have evidence of the higher entry standards of pre-90's universities?

To my knowledge, both Leeds and Northumbria University have significantly raised their entry requirements over the last 2 decades for the departments I know about (basically Leeds at least has introduced across the board high minimum entry requirements for all courses, so those such as less popular engineering disciplines that at one point had absolute minimum of EE (in relevant subjects) in the early 90's (not entirely sure about the 80s, but think it was roughly the same) now require something like BCC as a minimum across all courses, obviously more popular courses still need AAA etc.

I understand this is a common trend across most universities as they seem to think there is added kudos from having higher entry requirements, even if it results in courses having to close due to lower student numbers.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

To the first line - what?


----------



## free spirit (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> To the first line - what?


you seemed to be suggesting that pre-90's universities had higher entry standards, which I'm not at all sure is the case at least in pure A-Level grade terms.

If that's not what you were suggesting, then fair enough, but I can't see what your question to Dr Jon means without this being what you're suggesting.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

free spirit said:


> you seemed to be suggesting that pre-90's universities had higher entry standards, which I'm not at all sure is the case at least in pure A-Level grade terms.
> 
> If that's not what you were suggesting, then fair enough, but I can't see what your question to Dr Jon means without this being what you're suggesting.


He was moaning about mass entry lower level people going to university.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> He was moaning about mass entry lower level people going to university.


ah right, fair enough, I didn't notice that the statement started with Dr Jon, so I'll ask him that question instead.

tbh, it could be right that entry standards were lowered initially, but I'm pretty sure that isn't the case now.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> He was moaning about mass entry lower level people going to university.


No.  I said that my ex-tutors were moaning about:

being pushed by management to cobble together new, spurious, sexy-sounding courses
lowering entry requirements to get bums-on-seats = funding
the resulting decline in standards
That today's students have to go to college to learn how to play darts says it all really.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> No. I said that my ex-tutors were moaning about:
> 
> being pushed by management to cobble together new, spurious, sexy-sounding courses
> lowering entry requirements to get bums-on-seats = funding
> ...


 
No you did not.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 6, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No you did not.


Try reading you tedious troll.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> Try reading you tedious troll.


You mean you waffling on about what happened afterwards? Have another go.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> Try reading you tedious troll.


Let me get this right - i'm a troll? You think that the identifying mark of a troll is stuff like i post? This is what you Dr Jon think a troll is.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 7, 2012)

It would seem that the complaints made by my ex-tutors were indicative of a much wider problem:

Dumbing down of university grades revealed

Engineers add voice to concern over A-level maths standards

Schools fail to get 'spoonfed’ pupils ready for university

Another angle on this is that it is coupled to the need of the financial sector to have a fresh crop of punters up to their eyes in debt every year. A mate's eldest is back to pulling pints for a living, having just spent four years and £30k+ on a spurious media studies degree. With little prospect of ever being paid off, this debt will appear as a bank asset and will have helped some parasite get their bonus.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 7, 2012)

Dr Jon said:


> It would seem that the complaints made by my ex-tutors were indicative of a much wider problem:
> 
> Dumbing down of university grades revealed
> 
> ...


 
The first and third pieces you link to are opinions supported by selective use of data, i.e. they're shite.
The second piece is a good article, but only if you're a subscriber, or have an account for an academic library.

What's a "spurious media studies degree", by the way? What skills are learned?


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Aug 7, 2012)

once again the so called hard left winger apron manages to reduce the debate to minor inconsequential and petty point scoring over immaterial parts of the conversation.  Have you ever seen a big picture butchers?  just once.  or are you always arguing over the addition of a single word or phrase in a sentence...

It's exemplar as to why left wing politics never, ever, ever gains traction...


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 7, 2012)

free spirit said:


> Do you have evidence of the higher entry standards of pre-90's universities?
> 
> To my knowledge, both Leeds and Northumbria University have significantly raised their entry requirements over the last 2 decades for the departments I know about (basically Leeds at least has introduced across the board high minimum entry requirements for all courses, so those such as less popular engineering disciplines that at one point had absolute minimum of EE (in relevant subjects) in the early 90's (not entirely sure about the 80s, but think it was roughly the same) now require something like BCC as a minimum across all courses, obviously more popular courses still need AAA etc.
> 
> I understand this is a common trend across most universities as they seem to think there is added kudos from having higher entry requirements, even if it results in courses having to close due to lower student numbers.


Leeds now wants AAA for mechanical engineering, reasonably certain it was BCC or CCC when I accepted it as my 2nd choice 20 years ago. That's a big entry requirement increase in that timespan.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 7, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Leeds now wants AAA for mechanical engineering, reasonably certain it was BCC or CCC when I accepted it as my 2nd choice 20 years ago. That's a big entry requirement increase in that timespan.


nuts isn't it.

They're closing successful courses with very high graduate employment levels because they can't fill them due to these stupidly high entry requirements. Madness.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 7, 2012)

free spirit said:


> nuts isn't it.
> 
> They're closing successful courses with very high graduate employment levels because they can't fill them due to these stupidly high entry requirements. Madness.


I had at a look at my alma mater. I know it was CCC when I went now they want AAB. Insane. Utterly insane.


----------



## Dr Jon (Aug 22, 2012)

How The American University was Killed, in Five Easy Steps

First, you defund public higher education.
Second, you deprofessionalize and impoverish the professors
Step #3: You move in a managerial/administrative class who take over governance of the university.
Step Four: You move in corporate culture and corporate money
Step Five – Destroy the Students
 
Sound familiar?


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 22, 2012)

Starting salary for a UK lecturer ATM - afaict - is about £37k.

Is that impoverished? Maybe my perspective is skewed by previous top earnings of £18k, but to me that looks like a bloody good starting salary.

E2a: and I'm not sure many professors are "professionalised." One of the last refuges of semi-accountable fringe lunacy, again afaict.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 22, 2012)

mrs quoad said:


> Starting salary for a UK lecturer ATM - afaict - is about £37k.
> 
> Is that impoverished? Maybe my perspective is skewed by previous top earnings of £18k, but to me that looks like a bloody good starting salary.
> 
> E2a: and I'm not sure many professors are "professionalised." One of the last refuges of semi-accountable fringe lunacy, again afaict.


 
I suspect by "deprofessionalise", what is meant is that it becomes about *how much* the professor publishes, not about *what* gets published. The old "quantity beats quality" equation beloved of management, rather than the "quality beats quantity" equation beloved of academics.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 22, 2012)

mrs quoad said:


> Starting salary for a UK lecturer ATM - afaict - is about £37k.
> 
> Is that impoverished? Maybe my perspective is skewed by previous top earnings of £18k, but to me that looks like a bloody good starting salary.
> 
> E2a: and I'm not sure many professors are "professionalised." One of the last refuges of semi-accountable fringe lunacy, again afaict.


Technically yes, but this comes after 10 years of post-docs and short-term contracts and some of those years will have been stuck at the top of a payband meaning no payrise in those years.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 22, 2012)

mrs quoad said:


> Starting salary for a UK lecturer ATM - afaict - is about £37k.
> 
> Is that impoverished? Maybe my perspective is skewed by previous top earnings of £18k, but to me that looks like a bloody good starting salary.
> 
> E2a: and I'm not sure many professors are "professionalised." One of the last refuges of semi-accountable fringe lunacy, again afaict.


 
In Brum I was on 14K. A year.

True story, bro.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 22, 2012)

mrs quoad said:


> E2a: and I'm not sure many professors are "professionalised." One of the last refuges of semi-accountable fringe lunacy, again afaict.


Point.


----------

